Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Early Look at 2011 Schedule Gives Red Sox an Edge Over Yanks

January 17, 2011 by William Juliano

(In addition to appearing at The Captain’s Blog, this post is also being syndicated at TheYankeeU.)

The offseason is not over for the Yankees (they are reportedly nearing a deal for Andruw Jones), but as the days until pitchers and catchers wind down, it’s only naturally to shift focus from the moves being made in the front office to the schedule that lies ahead. Below is an initial breakdown of the Yankees’ 2011 campaign as well as a comparison to the slate of games that awaits the Boston Red Sox.

Yankees’ and Red Sox’ 2011 Schedule: Home/Road Breakdown

  Yankees   Red Sox
  Home Road Off Days   Home Road Off Days
March/April 19 8 4   12 15 3
May 13 16 2   18 12 1
June 16 10 4   10 15 5
July 13 14 4   14 12 5
August 9 20 2   14 14 3
September 11 13 4   13 13 2

Source: Yankees.com and Redsox.com

The Yankees jump out of the gate with 19 home games in April, more than any other month during the season. Over the first three months, the team will play 48 games in the Bronx, leaving the second half of the schedule dominated by road trips. In particular, August figures to be a real challenge. During the dog days of the pennant drive, the Yankees will find themselves on the road for 20 games. One positive is the Yankees only have to make two cross country flights. Since 2006, the team has had either three or four (2007) trips to the Pacific time zone. It should be noted, however, the one of the trips out west is an old school nine-game jaunt from Seattle down to Los Angeles, while the other is a six game stint in September.

The Red Sox have the most games at Fenway during May, but otherwise have a well balanced schedule: the first three months include 40 games at home and 42 on the road. However, the team does have five road trips of at least eight games (including three nine-game trips and one 10-game journey), compared to the Yankees’ three (including two nine game trips). To their advantage, Boston’s two trips to the West Coast will only involve nine games, while the Yankees’ two visits encompass 15.  Also, the Red Sox will have four homestands of at least nine games, including one of 10 and 11. The Yankees, on the other hand, will only have two.

Yankees and Red Sox 2011 Schedule: Opponent Breakdown

  Yankees     Red Sox
  Home Road     Home Road
Blue Jays 9 9   Blue Jays 9 9
Orioles 9 9   Orioles 9 9
Rays 9 9   Rays 9 9
Red Sox 9 9   Yankees 9 9
Indians 4 3   Indians 4 6
Royals 3 3   Royals 4 4
Tigers 3 4   Twins 4 3
Twins 4 4   Tigers 2 4
White Sox 4 4   White Sox 3 3
Angels 3 6   Angels 4 4
Athletics 6 3   Athletics 6 2
Mariners 3 6   Mariners 6 3
Rangers 6 3   Rangers 3 7
Brewers 3 0   Brewers 0 3
Cubs 0 3   Cubs 3 0
Mets 3 3   Astros 0 3
Reds 0 3   Padres 3 0
Rockies 3 0   Phillies 0 3
        Pirates 3 0

Source: Yankees.com and Redsox.com

Because of the current divisional setup as well as the existence of interleague play, division rivals do not play the same schedules. The most significant differences between the slate of teams that the Yankees and Red Sox will play are noted below:

  • The Red Sox will play one more game (and four more on the road) against the American League Champion Texas Rangers. Although the Rangers don’t seem as formidable without Cliff Lee, they still figure to be the team to beat in the A.L. West. Against the West Coast teams, the Yankees will not only play two more games (one more against the Angels and Athletics), but as previously mentioned, six more of them will take place on the road.
  • It looks as if the Yankees have a tougher schedule against the A.L. Central. Although the relative quality of the Twins, Tigers and White Sox is hard to figure at this point, it does seem more certain that the Royals and Indians will bring up the rear. If so, the Red Sox will benefit from having five more games against those two teams. Meanwhile, the Yankees have four more games against the other three teams in the Central.
  • In interleague, the Yankees could benefit from a down year for their cross-town rival. Meanwhile, the Red Sox must make a visit to Philadelphia to face the Phillies’ vaunted pitching staff. Unlike last year, however, the Red Sox have shed the Phillies as their “rival”, and will therefore not have to play them six games. Instead, they pick up an extra three game series against the woeful Pirates, which almost evens out the Yankees six games against the Mets. The rest of the interleague schedule also seems to tilt in Boston’s favor: the Yankees must face the Rockies and Reds, while the Red Sox will square up against the Astros and Padres.

Most experts believe that the Red Sox have assumed the mantle of favorite thanks to a busy offseason that has bolstered the team’s offense. However, it seems as if the schedule may also be a factor in helping Boston overcome the Yankees in 2011. Because so many things can change during the season, and strength of schedule is often more about when you play a team than whom you play, you can’t really read too much into an early comparison. Nonetheless, the Yankees do seem to face a more difficult road in 2011, which could make the offseason’s finishing touches all the more significant.

Posted in Baseball, MLB, Red Sox, Yankees | 1 Comment »

Rays Could Strike Gold in 2011 Draft, but Can They Afford to Mine It

January 15, 2011 by William Juliano

At the same time the Tampa Bay Rays have been dismantling their major league team, the organization has also been stockpiling draft picks. In addition to the team’s own first round selection (32nd overall), the Rays have amassed eight more early picks. As a result, GM Andrew Friedman and his staff will have the ability to select nine of the first 59 players taken in the draft, or over 15% of the best amateurs in the game.

On the surface, the Rays’ position seems very advantageous, all things considered of course. Although it’s a shame that the team wasn’t able to keep its core of quality players together, at least it has a strategy in place to replenish the organization with talent. However, building through the draft is no longer without its own financial concerns.

Rays’ 2011 Draft Position, Versus 2010 Actual Selections

Pick From For   2010 Selection Team Bonus (mn)
24 Red Sox C. Crawford   G. Brown Giants  $1.450
31 Yankees R. Soriano   J. O’Conner Rays  $1.025
32 Own NA   C. Culver Yankees  $0.954
38 Suppl. C. Crawford   N. Syndergaard Blue Jays  $0.600
41 Suppl. R. Soriano   A. Wojciechowski Blue Jays  $0.815
42 Suppl. G. Balfour   D. Vettleson Rays  $0.845
52 Suppl. J. Benoit   S. Allie  Pirates  $2.250
56 Suppl. R. Choate   J.  Bradley D’backs  $0.643
59 Suppl. B. Hawpe   J. Gyorko Padres  $0.614
          Total  $9.198

Source: perfectgame.org (Bonus data)

Based on last year’s signing bonuses, the nine comparable selections that the Rays have in 2011 would cost approximately $9 million. For a team like Tampa, that’s a significant obligation, especially when you consider that the eventual payoff, if it ever occurs, would not be until years down the road. Based on that reality, it’s much easier to see why the team traded Matt Garza (and his expected $6 million salary), although it does make you scratch your head even more at the signing of Kyle Farnsworth for $3.25 million. In any event, the Rays will likely have to tighten their belt to afford the bill that will come due after the June Rule IV draft.

Because of all the payroll that has already been shed, the Rays should be able to meet a $9 million price tag (as well as any additional cost from their subsequent picks). However, it should be noted that talent doesn’t always dictate the order of draft selections. That’s why, for example, Stetson Allie, who was selected by the Pirates with the 52nd pick, earned a signing bonus that was double that paid by the Yankees to Cito Culver with the 31st selection. In other words, the referenced $9 million price tag wouldn’t cover the best players in the draft, but instead those with the best combination of ability and sign-ability.

The draft is already a crapshoot, so making selections based on economic concerns adds yet another layer of uncertainty to the process. In a perfect world, the Rays would be able to use their nine first round selections on the very best players available, but what would that approach cost?

Bonus Figures for Selected 2010 MLB Draftees

Pick Team Player  Bonus
28 Dodgers Zach Lee  $5,250,000
39 Red Sox Anthony Ranaudo  $2,550,000
44 Tigers Nick Castellanos  $3,450,000
45 Rangers Luke Jackson  $1,557,000
48 Tigers Chance Ruffin  $1,150,000
50 Cardinals Tyrell Jenkins  $1,300,000
116 Nationals A.J. Cole  $2,000,000
145 Yankees Mason Williams  $1,450,000
184 Padres John Barbato  $1,400,000
    Total  $20,107,000

Note: If drafted in order,  all of the players above would have been available to a team with the same draft picks as the Rays will have in 2011.
Source: perfectgame.org

Again using last year’s draft as a proxy, a team with the same draft picks as the Rays will have in 2011 would have spent over $20 million had they chosen the best players available, as defined by signing bonuses. Granted, a higher signing bonus doesn’t necessarily mean a better player, but the illustration is clear: it can be very expensive to have nine first round picks.

According to many in the know, the 2011 draft is expected to be talent laden. That could work in the Rays’ advantage by allowing them to pass over players with higher bonus demands. On the other hand, it could wind up exposing the team to even higher costs (assuming bonuses are paid on precedent and talent instead of supply and demand). If the latter market exists, the Rays may be forced to forfeit some of the value implied by their high draft slots (a problem exacerbated by MLB’s rule against trading Rule IV picks).

Sometimes when we talk about the value of a draft pick, we forget that it also has an associated cost. When you consider the inherent risks involved, both in terms of player development and brand diminishment (i.e., losing for a prolonged period on the major league level), building through the draft is not necessarily a pain-free strategy. It has worked for the Rays in the past, but not before having to endure a decade of awful baseball. Although the payoff from accumulating draft picks was two division titles and an A.L. pennant, it could be argued that the team’s inability to increase revenues and attendance are still the result of its earlier, more lengthy struggles.

The Rays situation in Tampa is defined by many unique economic realities, not the least of which is its isolated location in St. Petersburg, but ultimately the franchise will need a longer period of sustained success before it can truly gain economic viability. If the Rays take a significant step back in their current rebuilding program, the patience of the fan base could eventually run out. The Rays don’t have much margin for error in that regard, so in more ways than one, the future of the franchise could be riding on the impact of the 2011 draft.

Posted in Baseball, Draft, MLB, Yankees | Tagged | 1 Comment »

Soriano Signing Makes Yanks Better on the Field, but Does it Reveal a Split in the Front Office?

January 14, 2011 by William Juliano

All winter, Brian Cashman has taken his lumps for patiently biding his time during the off season. However, those criticism were nothing compared to harsh rebukes he has received in the hours since John Heyman announced that the Yankees had signed Rafael Soriano.

According to reports, Randy Levine and Brian Cashman may not have seen eye-to-eye over the Soriano contract (Photo: The Star-Ledger).

Before delving into the wisdom of the signing, the pink elephant in the room is Cashman’s earlier insistence that the Yankees would not surrender a first round pick for any free agent not named Cliff Lee. So, either Cashman was holding his cards close to the vest (i.e., lying), had a serious change of heart, or was overruled by another in the organization.

If Cashman was being deceptive, well, good for him. His chief responsibility is to make the Yankees better, so if that means throwing up a smoke screen or two, so be it. Unfortunately, it’s hard to see where the Yankees benefitted from an improved negotiation position, but then again, the full details of the contract and pursuant negotiations have not been revealed. Nonetheless, a general managers’ commandments are made to be broken when the right (or sometimes wrong) deal comes along. Just ask Bubba Crosby.

As mentioned, the exact terms of the Soriano contract have not yet been divulged, so in the details may be the reason why Cashman did an about face from his earlier vow.  Maybe he believed that Soriano would return to the Rays at a discount, or sign with a wild card competitor? Perhaps further evaluation of the draft revealed less than promising prospects for the 31st pick? Maybe it was Andy Pettitte’s latest display of indecision that pushed his hand? Or, it could be that Cashman has other contingent moves in place (e.g., moving Joba Chamberlain back to the rotation, or a trade that involves the team’s now impressive bullpen depth)? Regardless, just because Cashman changed his mind doesn’t mean he panicked.

The third option is the one that is cause for real concern. In his daily column, Buster Olney hinted at a divide within the Yankees organization, while Peter Gammons tweeted that Randy Levine was the driving force behind the signing. Even Mariano Rivera has been credited with holding sway. If true, that could be disastrous for the Yankees. Whether you like Cashman or not, the Yankees have seemed to benefit from having one coherent voice on baseball-related matters, so a return to the days of front office factions could have undesirable consequences. I am sure more on that topic will be written in the coming days, but usually when there’s an early leak, there’s also an unhappy general manager.

Putting aside the intrigue behind the Yankees’ change in course, let’s now return to an examination of the player and the contract (for a concise rundown of how the Yankees blogosphere has reacted to the deal, check out Bronx Banter). The biggest criticism of the deal has dealt with the fact that Soriano does not address the team’s greatest weakness, which, of course, is the starting rotation. But, should that really make a difference? The Yankees did not get Cliff Lee, nor were they able to trade for Zack Greinke or Matt Garza. Nothing can change that reality, and there are no apparent acquisition targets capable of filling the resulting void.

Instead of focusing on a cadre of has-beens, also-rans, and could-bes, the Yankees instead decided to bolster the backend of the bullpen with a bonafide quality reliever. Granted, the contract, which at $11.7 million per year makes Soriano the third highest paid reliever in the game, seems exorbitant, but should that matter to anyone but the Yankees’ accountants? After all, just because he will be paid closer money doesn’t mean he won’t be very valuable pitching in the eighth inning. When you are a billion dollar franchise in an offseason when no one else will take your money, you can afford that kind of luxury.

Another knock on the contract stems from the fact that Soriano has had Tommy John surgery, but since undergoing the procedure in 2004, he bounced back with healthy seasons in four of the last five. In 2008, however, Soriano missed most of the season and eventually required another elbow surgery, so the risk is definitely real. But, again, that’s really a financial concern.

Does Soriano have a higher power (Mariano Rivera) to thank for his contract with the Yankees?

Statistically speaking, it’s nearly impossible to justify the monetary terms of the contract, so once you get past that hang-up, the bottom line becomes that the Yankees are a better team with Soriano than without. Even if one wanted to boil down the addition in terms of value added, it could be argued that if he pitches as he did in 2010, Soriano would come close to approximating the contribution that would be lost if Andy Pettitte does in fact retire. Also, in addition to giving the Yankees one of the major’s best bullpens, it also provides the team more flexibility, both in terms of whom they can move into the rotation and how much rest they can afford Rivera. There is a domino effect at play, and although the benefits don’t trickle down enough to match a $12 million outlay, the addition of Soriano does strengthen the team.

Perhaps the most legitimate criticism of the deal centers around losing the 31st pick in the 2011 Rule IV draft. It should be noted, however, that the Yankees still have a supplemental round pick thanks to the departure of Javier Vazquez. So, if the draft really is as deep as many experts have suggested, the Yankees should still have enough quality selections to replenish their farm system.

Finally, much has been made of Soriano’s opt out clauses, which allow him to terminate the deal after the first two seasons AND be paid a $1.5 million buyout for his troubles. Although this may seem to be a very one-sided perk, it actually gives the Yankees an out in the event that Soriano has a terrific 2011 season. Because the contract is end-loaded, it isn’t likely that Soriano’s future performance would ever surpass his salary, so if the right hander were to allow his ego to send him back into the free agent market, the Yankees would be freed of the risk associated with the length of the deal. In other words, the Yankees would wind up with one great year from Soriano and Type-A free agent compensation, which means they’d swap one draft pick for two. Should that happen, the Yankees’ end of the bargain would look much better, which is exactly why the opt outs are probably more in their best interest than Soriano’s (i.e., it provides him with a temptation that isn’t likely to work toward his benefit).

Posted in Baseball, MLB, Yankees | Tagged , , | 4 Comments »

Yankees, Fans Continue “Favre Watch”, but Is Team Better Off Waiting for Andy?

January 13, 2011 by William Juliano

In New York circles, the Andy Pettitte retirement watch has taken on an almost Brett Favre-like quality. Perhaps because the Yankees have had such a quiet offseason, “no news” on the matter has been reported with grave seriousness. The latest example occurred last night when the Daily News reported that Brian Cashman said Pettitte would not start the season in 2011. That story quickly made the rounds around the baseball world, setting off a Twitter firestorm and causing great panic in Yankeeland.

Well, not so fast.

The media and fans have been fishing for definitive news about Pettitte, but the lefty has been busy with other pursuits.

Almost immediately after the original report was circulated, Cashman rebutted the inferences that were made from his comments and reiterated that nothing further had developed. In other words, Pettitte has still not made up his mind.

Pettitte’s indecision, the Yankees pressing need for his services, and the local media’s overreaction to the smallest developments are all direct parallels to the annual Brett Favre circus that has occurred over the past three years. Thankfully, however, the similarities stop there. For one thing, you can be sure that Pettitte’s holdout is not based on ego, but rather a genuine uncertainty about whether or not he still wants to play. What’s more, Pettitte has not been giving conflicted accounts of his intentions, nor has he been leaking his thoughts to favored members of the media. Finally, contrary to some Yankees’ fans insistence, he is not holding up the team’s preparation for 2011. Andy Pettitte is no Brett Favre.

Although losing Pettitte would be a blow to the Yankees, the urgency of his decision is not really as great as it may seem. After all, just look at Pettitte’s last three seasons in pinstripes. He pitched through an injury in 2008, had several starts skipped in 2009 and then missed two months in 2010. Based on that progression, it seems likely that even if Pettitte was already signed to a contract and working out like a devil, he would still miss a significant portion of 2011.

The Yankees don’t need Pettitte to make a decision about pitching the entire season because it’s likely that he can’t anyway. Just because the Yankees’ rotation has been weakened doesn’t mean the veteran lefty can turn back the hands of time. So, instead of trying to force Pettitte into returning by April, the Yankees might actually be better off if he settled on a mid-season start.

If Pettitte is going to miss a couple of months, it might as well be the first two of the season. Even though the division seems like a tall order with two-thirds of the opening day rotation still undecided, the Yankees remain a good bet for the wild card. Having a healthy Pettitte in October would be a vital part of another championship run, so that end game is ultimately what must dictate both Pettitte’s and the Yankees’ motivations. That’s why the if, and not the when, is the important question to answer.

Although it’s hard not fret at the notion of Pettitte actually retiring, that bridge doesn’t need to be crossed until the summer. In the meantime, the Yankees just need to hope that Pettitte will soon resume his offseason workouts…and, just to be safe, it might be a good idea if he avoided sending pictures from his cell phone.

Posted in Baseball, MLB, Yankees | Tagged , | Leave a Comment »

Is Trevor Hoffman a Lock for the Hall of Fame (or Even a Worthy Candidate)?

January 12, 2011 by William Juliano

Are 601 saves enough to get Trevor Hoffman into the Hall of Fame?

When Trevor Hoffman recorded his 600th save back in September, I kind of paid him a backhanded complement by unfavorably comparing him to Mariano Rivera. The intention wasn’t to denigrate Hoffman, who has had a wonderful career, but rebut the notion that put both relievers in the same class. In any event, Hoffman has now officially retired with 601 saves, leaving him just 42 ahead of Rivera, so, when all is said and done, he may eventually find himself looking up at the great Yankees closer in even that regard.

For a fitting tribute to Hoffman, Buster Olney does the job quite well. However, Olney goes way overboard by suggesting he “should be an absolute lock first-ballot Hall of Famer”. Make no mistake about it. Hoffman deserves serious Hall of Fame consideration, and he does seem a fair bet to win eventual enshrinement. However, he is far from a slam dunk candidate.

If Olney is correct, then it will mean that Hall of Famer votes are still fixated on the saves stat. Recent voting trends, however, suggest otherwise. One of the ironies behind the recent elections of Bruce Sutter and Rich Gossage is a greater appreciation of the roles they filled seemed to come at the expense of the value placed on the modern closer. Gossage’s own comments about the evolving role of the reliever have highlighted this give and take.

When Lee Smith first appeared on the ballot in 2003, he was the career saves leader with 478, but only polled 42.3% of the vote. That same year, Sutter (300 saves) earned 53.6%, while Gossage (310 saves) tallied 42.1%. In the intervening years, both Sutter and Gossage earned enshrinement, while Smith’s vote total stagnated (in the most recent election, he polled 45.3%). If saves were the driving factor behind a reliever’s Hall of Fame credentials then wouldn’t Smith have been the more popular candidate?

It should be noted that Hoffman’s 601 saves are almost equal to the totals of Sutter and Gossage combined. So, it is possible that such a large number could hold sway. On the other hand, if Rivera does eventually take the lead, it could remove some of the bloom off that figure by the time five years go by. What’s more, if guys like Francisco Rodriguez (268 saves, 28 years old) and Jonathan Papelbon (188 saves, 29 years old) continue their march to 400 saves by 2016, it could further remove some luster from Hoffman’s 601.

Assuming that saves alone do not a Hall of Fame reliever make, we then need to examine how Hoffman compares to his peers in other regards. As previously mentioned, Rivera really is in a class unto himself, which may or may not impact the consideration of other contemporary relievers. So, where does Hoffman stand among the second tier of modern closers?

The 400 Save Club

  SV G IP ERA+ OPS+ WHIP K/9 WAR
Trevor Hoffman 601 1035 1089.1 141 67 1.058 9.4 30.7
Mariano Rivera 559 978 1150 204 45 1.003 8.2 52.9
Lee Smith 478 1022 1289.1 132 79 1.256 8.7 30.3
John Franco 424 1119 1245.2 138 84 1.333 7 25.8
Billy Wagner 422 853 903 187 48 0.998 11.9 29.7

Source: Baseball-reference.com

Although Hoffman stands atop the list above in saves, he really doesn’t stand out in any other category. In fact, it’s really Billy Wagner who seems to emerge as the leader of the “not Rivera” group. Considering that both Wagner and Hoffman will go on the ballot together, it could be very difficult for either one to distinguish himself enough to earn a first ballot entry.

Post Season Performance of 400 Save Club

  IP W L S ERA IP WHIP
Mariano Rivera 139.2 8 1 42 0.71 139.2 0.766
John Franco 14.1 2 0 1 1.88 14.1 0.977
Trevor Hoffman 13 1 2 4 3.46 13 1.231
Lee Smith 5.1 0 2 1 8.44 5.1 1.875
Billy Wagner 11.2 1 1 3 10.03 11.2 1.971

Source: Baseball-reference.com

Postseason performance is what really allows Rivera to lap the field. Although Hoffman’s 3.46 ERA is respectable, none of the other relievers really have much of a sample to consider. If anything, Hoffman’s high profile blown save in the 1998 World Series could actually work against him, especially among that portion of the electorate that seems fixated on moments (see Jack Morris).

One final note of warning regarding Hoffman’s Hall of Fame chances comes from the results of the 2011 ballot. John Franco, who is a worthy comparable to Hoffman, not only did poorly in the polling, but actually fell off the ballot with only 4.6% of the vote. Although not 601, Franco’s save total is still fourth all-time, and that obviously had little sway with the voters.

Is Trevor Hoffman a Hall of Famer? At this point in time, I think it is too difficult to tell. What he is not, however, is a lock, and particularly not a first ballot lock. In the wake of a player’s retirement, many can be prone to exaggeration. That’s why the Hall of Fame makes its electorate wait five years before casting a ballot.

Posted in Baseball, Baseball History, Hall of Fame, MLB, Yankees | Tagged | 7 Comments »

A Look at Arod’s 2010 Peformance Against Lefties

January 11, 2011 by William Juliano

Over at the Yankeeist, Larry Koestler took a look at one of 2010’s most curious mysteries: Alex Rodriguez’ shockingly poor performance against left handed pitchers. Using pitchFX data, Koestler concludes that the pitch selection of opposing southpaws (i.e., fewer four seamers and more cutters, two seamers and sinkers) contributed to Arod’s struggles (while also conceding the limited sample size), but could the answer be much more benign?

Alex Rodriguez’ BABIP vs. LD%, 2004-2010

Note: Columns represent LD%; lines represent BABIP.
Source: Baseball-reference.com and fangraphs.com

What jumps off the stat page most about Arod’s 2010 season is his BABIP of .212 against left handers, which is by far his lowest rate in either split since joining the Yankees. Although it may be too easy to attribute all of Arod’s struggles against lefties to bad luck, his very low batting average on balls in play seems to suggest that fortune wasn’t always on his side. Then again, it’s also possible that Arod’s lower BABIP resulted from weaker contact, and, in fact, that seems to be the case. As a Yankee, Arod’s line drive percentage against lefties had ranged from 14.2% in 2004 to a whopping 26.4% in 2009 before falling to 12.10% last year. More specifically, Arod’s line drive percentage declined the most against lefties’ cutters, two seamers and sinkers…the same three pitches identified by Koestler.

Alex Rodriguez’ LD% by Pitch Type, 2009-2010

Note:  Columns represent number of pitches; lines represent LD%
Legend: CH – Changeup; CU – Curveball; FA – Fastball; FC – Fastball (Cutter); FF – Fastball (Four-seam); FT – Fastball (Two-seam); SI – Sinker; and SL – Slider
Source: Baseball-reference.com and joelefkowitz.com

So, have left handers found a way to combat Arod by throwing pitches that he can not drive? Or could the answer be more about who is throwing those pitches than the selection itself? In 2010, Alex Rodriguez batted 189 times against lefties, including 49 times, or 26%, against David Price, Johan Santana, Ricky Romero, Cliff Lee, and Francisco Liriano. Against that cross section, Arod batted .114/.204/.182. In 2009, Arod faced that quintet only 37 times, or 21%. Interestingly, however, he did quite well against this group, posting a solid line of .241/.405/.448. When you consider how Arod handled the league’s best lefties in 2009, it’s no surprise he had such an outstanding season against southpaws (in both years, Arod excelled against Jon Lester).

Alex Rodriguez’ PAs vs. Select Top Lefties

Player 2010 2009
David Price 13 9
Cliff Lee 10 11
Francisco Liriano 10 6
Ricky Romero 9 9
Johan Santana 7 2
Total 49 37

Source: Baseball-reference.com

The knee jerk reaction would be to suggest that Arod’s skills are in decline and, therefore, he can no longer hit the league’s best lefties. However, a closer look at the five lefties who dominated Arod in 2010 reveals that they all improved their performance against righties by varying degrees from 2009. In other words, Arod’s struggles last year may be more about them than him.

Select Top Lefties vs. RHB, 2009-2010

Source: Baseball-reference.com

Often times, the desire to pinpoint the reason behind an outlier can lead to a variety of plausible theories. However, the small samples involved make all but the most glaring conclusions lack the necessary significance to be convincing. As a result, although we know Arod must hit better against lefties in 2011, it remains to be seen whether that means he’ll need to figure out how to handle a lefty’s cutter, or just how to handle David Price.

Posted in Alex Rodriguez, Arod, Baseball, MLB, Statistical Analysis, Yankees | Leave a Comment »

Can the Yankees Sign Soriano Without Surrendering a Draft Pick?

January 10, 2011 by William Juliano

During the entire off season, the Yankees have been stymied in their attempt to add a starting pitcher. First, Cliff Lee eschewed their hefty contract offer because of the apparent belief that it’s always sunny in Philadelphia, and then Zack Greinke and Matt Garza were both traded to the friendly confines of the NL Central. Making matters worse, Andy Pettitte has spent most of the winter on a beach in Hawaii instead of his gym back in Texas, leaving Brian Cashman with little alternative than to patiently bide his time. Well, it’s time for him to make a master stroke.

Is Rafael Soriano worth losing a first round draft pick? (AP Photo/Tony Gutierrez)

Aside from hoping that Pettitte has a change of heart, the Yankees seem destined to enter 2011 with a compromised rotation. Without any viable starters to pursue at this point, the idea of locking down the late innings by adding Rafael Soriano to the backend of the bullpen has surfaced. The only problem with that option, however, is Soriano’s status as a Type-A free agent. So, if the Yankees decided to sign the former Rays’ closer to pitch in middle relief, it would not only cost a pretty penny, but also a first round draft selection (which, to make matters worse, would be forfeited to a division rival).

Despite all the rumors of the Yankees’ interest in Soriano, Cashman has been emphatic to the contrary. In fact, he couldn’t have been more explicit on the topic. “I will not lose our number one draft pick,” Cashman was quoted as saying by the LoHud Yankees Blog. “I would have for Cliff Lee. I won’t lose our number one draft pick for anyone else.”

But, what if the Yankees didn’t have to give up their first round pick to get Soriano? The reporters at LoHud asked Cashman about the possibility of such a “sign and trade”, but he seemed to dismiss it as a “legal maneuver” that was both difficult and rare. Desperate times call for desperate measures, however, so if such an arrangement is possible, the Yankees should keep exploring every option.

For those unfamiliar with baseball’s free agency compensation rules, here’s how it basically works (for a more detailed explanation, click here). At the end of the season, prospective free agents are rated and classified as either Type-A or Type-B. Soriano was labeled a Type-A free agent, so a team that signs him would have to give the Rays their first round pick. However, if that team finished in the bottom half of the standings (ranked 16-30), their first round pick would be protected, meaning they would only have to yield a second round selection (or a third rounder if that same team already signed a higher rated free agent).

As this MLB.com report confirms, sign-and-trade deals are permissible, but only with the prior written consent of the free agent involved. Normally, a recently signed free agent can not be traded until June 15, but a player can waive that requirement of the Basic Agreement. As a result, if the Yankees were to be involved in such a deal, they would not only have to negotiate with another team, but Soriano as well.

In order for the hypothetical sign-and-trade to work, the Yankees would first have to agree to terms with Soriano and then convince another team to sign him on their behalf. Then, they would also have to compensate that team for both facilitating the signing and surrendering their draft selection in the process. Theoretically, any club could serve as the surrogate, but the cost of compensating a team that has to give up its first round pick could itself be prohibitive. Instead, the most likely scenario would involve a team that either has a protected first round pick or already surrendered it because of a prior free agent signing. Of course, the optimal candidate would be a team that qualifies on both accounts, and this year, the Washington Nationals just so happen to fit the bill.

Because of their poor placement in the standings, the Nationals hold the number six pick overall, which, as previously mentioned, is protected. For that reason, when the team signed Jayson Werth, it only had to yield a second round selection to the Phillies. Therefore, if the Yankees came to an agreement with the Nationals, the latter would only have to send a third round pick to the Rays as compensation for signing Soriano (Werth’s Elias rating of 91.807 is just a shade ahead of Soriano’s 91.799).

As things currently stand, the Nationals’ third round selection is 92nd overall (before the first and second rounds is a supplemental round that includes other free agent compensation picks). Although one can never assume the level of compensation that the Nationals would expect for surrendering this slot in the draft, the value would undoubtedly be significantly less than what the Yankees would otherwise have to give up in a straight free agent signing. Also worth keeping in mind is that the Nationals received another first pick as well as a supplemental pick (34th overall) because of Adam Dunn’s departure to the White Sox. Both of those selections are also protected, so Washington essentially has three first round picks. Considering the amount of money it will cost to sign all three of the selected players, the Nationals may actually be eager to give up their third rounder (and the signing bonus that comes with it) in exchange for a cost-controlled minor leaguer.

Could a sign-and-trade deal involving Soriano be the latest "chess move" in the ongoing rivalry with the Red Sox?

One other advantage to this sign-and-trade arrangement would be the Rays would not get a first round pick for Soriano. In fact, they wouldn’t even get a second rounder. Forcing a chief rival to pick as many as 70 slots lower in the draft is not an insignificant consideration. Along those lines, the Yankees could also turn to the Rangers or Tigers if the Nationals prove too unreasonable. Although both of those team still have their second rounders, each has already surrendered its first pick to the Red Sox because of the Adrian Beltre and Victor Martinez signings. Because Soriano rates higher than Beltre and Martinez, the Red Sox would have to settle for a second rounder if either the Tigers or Rangers signed the reliever on behalf of the Yankees. Undoubtedly, such an arrangement would cost the Yankees much more than a deal with the Nationals, but it would have the added benefit of lowering the value of the Red Sox’ draft pick.

Most of the time, Brian Cashman has had the luxury of being the bully on the block. This offseason, however, he has been forced to be more of a chess master. To date, the events of the winter have kept the Yankees’ plans in check, so perhaps the time has come for a more creative endgame strategy? It’s Cashman move, but can he find someone else to play along?

Posted in Baseball, MLB, Trades, Yankees | Tagged , , | 1 Comment »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »