As the Red Sox assemble their 25-man roster for Opening Day -- months away, to be sure, but has that ever stopped us before? -- here's one thing to remember: Both new acquisition Jeremy Hermida and July acquisition Casey Kotchman have minor-league options remaining.
If the Red Sox lose out on Jason Bay and still want to go after a righthanded-hitting outfielder or two, they wouldn't necessarily have to non-tender (or trade) Hermida. If the Red Sox acquired an infielder like Adrian Gonzalez, they wouldn't necessarily have to non-tender (or trade) Kotchman.
It's easy to forget given how fast both Hermida and Kotchman established themselves in the major leagues, but it's also a byproduct of how fast both established themselves in the major leagues. Every major-league player, don't forget, has three minor-league options that teams still can exercise as long as that player has fewer than five years of major-league service time.
Both Kotchman and Hermida have between three and four years of accrued major-league service time.
(One more technicality: If a player spends fewer than 20 days in the minor leagues in a season, he has not burned a minor-league option.)
Hermida jumped from Double-A to the major leagues in August of 2005 and was added to the Marlins' 40-man roster for the first time at that point. He hasn't spent any significant time in the minor leagues since -- and thus hasn't burned an option. Technically, all three of his minor-league options still are available, but he can't be optioned without his permission once he's hit five full season, so he really has two minor-league options left.
Kotchman was added to the Angels' 40-man roster in May of 2004 when first baseman Darin Erstad was placed on the disabled list. He was shipped back to the minor leagues a month later upon the return of Erstad -- his first minor-league option. He then opened the 2005 season in Triple-A -- his second major-league option -- before being recalled for good in late May.
He hasn't spent more than 20 days in the minor leagues in any season since -- meaning his third minor-league option still is available should the Red Sox want to exercise it.
The Marlins couldn't exactly afford to pay Hermida $4 million -- his likely arbitration award -- if he wasn't going to be in their starting outfield. The Red Sox, on the other hand, wouldn't mind paying Hermida $4 million to start the season in Triple-A Pawtucket as part of a long-term investment in a former first-round pick with all the physical skills they could want.
Think of it this way: If Hermida becomes the hitter the Red Sox believe he can be, there's no reason he couldn't replace David Ortiz as the team's regular designated hitter in 2011 even if Jason Bay re-ups. Hermida also becomes perfect J.D. Drew insurance in the event the 34-year-old isn't as healthy next season as he was last season: The Red Sox could stash him in Pawtucket and call him up if and when Drew needs to spend some time on the 15-day disabled list.
Rocco Baldelli might be back. Josh Willingham -- or another righthanded-hitting outfielder -- might be acquired. It would appear the Red Sox would run into a roster crunch with the players they've assembled.
But because Hermida and Kotchman both established themselves in the major leagues so quickly, they both can be sent to the minor leagues next spring if that's what helps the Red Sox fit everyone in.
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
Monday, November 9, 2009
Recent moves mean Lowrie is Boston's guy
There aren't many shortstops available on the free-agent market -- or, at least, many appealing shortstops available. If Bobby Crosby or Adam Everett excite you, well, you might want to calm down.
That means, barring a run after blog favorite Marco Scutaro, a slick-fielding shortstop and third baseman coming off a career year, the Twins' acquisition of J.J. Hardy means the Red Sox still see Jed Lowrie as their long-term shortstop.
The report Sunday that the Red Sox had declined their option on Alex Gonzalez, well, that only reinforces the idea.
Theo Epstein told reporters after the season that he didn't envision Lowrie going into spring training as the unquestioned starting shortstop based on his up-and-down health history in his short career in the major leagues.
"I don’t think we can hand a job to him because he hasn’t proved his health yet at this point," Epstein said. "But at the same time, I wouldn’t be surprised if we’re sitting here at this time next year, ... looking back and saying, 'Wow, he really got healthy and proved himself in winning that job or playing his way into a meaningful role.'"
But Lowrie spent most of September telling reporters his surgically repaired wrist would be fine after a winter of rest.
"Going into the offseason," he said, "if I do what I did last offseason, I think I'm going to feel like I did during spring training -- but have a structurally sound wrist as opposed to having a broken wrist."
If the Red Sox didn't share that sentiment, they wouldn't have declined their option on Gonzalez -- and they might have made a harder run at Hardy. Gonzalez seemed like a natural fit as a one-year stopgap for Lowrie, and Hardy looked like a potential long-term solution at the position if he could show that his .229 batting average and .659 OPS a year ago was a fluke.
But neither Gonzalez nor Hardy has ever OBP'ed better than .343 for a single season. Hardy's .368 on-base percentage in a full season in Double-A was his highest as a professional; in five seasons in the minor leagues, his career OBP is .332.
Lowrie, on the other hand, got on base at a .339 clip in his first prolonged action in the major leagues in 2008 and hadn't ever OBP'ed less than .350 in the minor leagues until his injury-plagued season in 2009. In a season split between Double-A and Triple-A in 2007, Lowrie OBP'ed .393 and slugged .503 -- his 47 doubles in fewer than 600 plate appearances a remarkable feat.
(For the sake of comparison, Dustin Pedroia hit 48 doubles for the Red Sox this season but needed 714 plate appearances to do it.)
Two injury-plagued seasons aren't enough for the Red Sox to give up on Jed Lowrie. He might never hit 20 home runs in a season, but he's capable of 40 or 50 doubles a season to go along with steady defense at the infield's most important position.
The Red Sox still might try to bring Gonzalez back at a lower number to provide a little insurance. But if they deemed him critical to the team's success, they'd have picked up his $6 million option -- a relative pittance for a team with a $100 million payroll and World Series aspirations.
Actions speak louder than words. The Red Sox still believe they're a better team with Lowrie at shortstop than with Gonzalez or Hardy -- or just about any of their other options.
That means, barring a run after blog favorite Marco Scutaro, a slick-fielding shortstop and third baseman coming off a career year, the Twins' acquisition of J.J. Hardy means the Red Sox still see Jed Lowrie as their long-term shortstop.
The report Sunday that the Red Sox had declined their option on Alex Gonzalez, well, that only reinforces the idea.
Theo Epstein told reporters after the season that he didn't envision Lowrie going into spring training as the unquestioned starting shortstop based on his up-and-down health history in his short career in the major leagues.
"I don’t think we can hand a job to him because he hasn’t proved his health yet at this point," Epstein said. "But at the same time, I wouldn’t be surprised if we’re sitting here at this time next year, ... looking back and saying, 'Wow, he really got healthy and proved himself in winning that job or playing his way into a meaningful role.'"
But Lowrie spent most of September telling reporters his surgically repaired wrist would be fine after a winter of rest.
"Going into the offseason," he said, "if I do what I did last offseason, I think I'm going to feel like I did during spring training -- but have a structurally sound wrist as opposed to having a broken wrist."
If the Red Sox didn't share that sentiment, they wouldn't have declined their option on Gonzalez -- and they might have made a harder run at Hardy. Gonzalez seemed like a natural fit as a one-year stopgap for Lowrie, and Hardy looked like a potential long-term solution at the position if he could show that his .229 batting average and .659 OPS a year ago was a fluke.
But neither Gonzalez nor Hardy has ever OBP'ed better than .343 for a single season. Hardy's .368 on-base percentage in a full season in Double-A was his highest as a professional; in five seasons in the minor leagues, his career OBP is .332.
Lowrie, on the other hand, got on base at a .339 clip in his first prolonged action in the major leagues in 2008 and hadn't ever OBP'ed less than .350 in the minor leagues until his injury-plagued season in 2009. In a season split between Double-A and Triple-A in 2007, Lowrie OBP'ed .393 and slugged .503 -- his 47 doubles in fewer than 600 plate appearances a remarkable feat.
(For the sake of comparison, Dustin Pedroia hit 48 doubles for the Red Sox this season but needed 714 plate appearances to do it.)
Two injury-plagued seasons aren't enough for the Red Sox to give up on Jed Lowrie. He might never hit 20 home runs in a season, but he's capable of 40 or 50 doubles a season to go along with steady defense at the infield's most important position.
The Red Sox still might try to bring Gonzalez back at a lower number to provide a little insurance. But if they deemed him critical to the team's success, they'd have picked up his $6 million option -- a relative pittance for a team with a $100 million payroll and World Series aspirations.
Actions speak louder than words. The Red Sox still believe they're a better team with Lowrie at shortstop than with Gonzalez or Hardy -- or just about any of their other options.
Friday, November 6, 2009
Cameron an option with Hermida in fold
The signing of Jeremy Hermida might be a lottery ticket, a flier on a former first-round draft pick with untapped talent. But it also presents questions about how the Red Sox might put together their outfield should Jason Bay skip town.
J.D. Drew, Jacoby Ellsbury and Jeremy Hermida all are lefthanded hitters -- and that might be a little more lefty-heavy than Theo Epstein or Terry Francona want their outfield to be.
The possibility of a platoon situation, though, remains viable.
That's where Mike Cameron comes into play.
The 36-year-old outfielder almost certainly will not return to Milwaukee now that the Brewers acquired Carlos Gomez from the Twins. Cameron has been a starting outfielder for most of his career -- and an All-Star-caliber outfielder at that -- but his age and the depressed free-agent market means he might not be able to be picky with his next destination.
Boston could be that destination.
Cameron, first and foremost, is a terrific defensive outfielder. His Ultimate Zone Rating (10.0) ranked him 12th in the major leagues last season, and his Fielding Bible Plus-Minus (plus-5) ranked him 16th in the major leagues. A year ago, he had an UZR of 11.3 and a plus-minus of 12.
He'd be a substantial defensive upgrade over Bay, an outfielder who, no matter what his agent says, is well below average at getting to the ball.
But Cameron also is a righthanded hitter with a career OPS of .859 against lefthanded pitching -- something the Red Sox desperately need if they don't bring back Bay. They can't go up against CC Sabathia with four or five lefties in their lineup -- not, at least, if they plan on scoring any runs.
He also probably would enjoy taking aim at the Green Monster, at least as far as his HitTrackerOnline.com home-run chart is concerned:
Cameron is a career center fielder but, given his skills, probably could adapt either to left field or right field. He could platoon with Hermida in left field -- especially on the road, where defense is more of an issue than at Fenway Park. (Hermida has been a below-average outfielder throughout his career.)
He also could spell Drew in right field against lefthanded pitching without costing the Red Sox anything in the way of defense. Here's how it might break down:
Against LHP at home: Cameron LF, Ellsbury CF, Drew RF
(Hermida could spell Drew every once in a while.)
Against RHP at home: Hermida LF, Ellsbury CF, Drew RF
Against LHP on the road: Cameron LF, Ellsbury CF, Drew RF
(Hermida again could spell Drew sometimes.)
Against RHP on the road: Cameron LF, Ellsbury CF, Drew RF
(You could make an argument that Cameron belongs in center field more than Ellsbury given their disparate numbers. According to MLB Trade Rumors, Cameron has professed a desire to play center field with whichever team lands him, and there are those who believe Ellsbury's future lies in left field. But Ellsbury still has all the tools to be an elite center fielder, and if that's what the Red Sox see him being, he needs to keep playing out there to learn how to read the ball off the bat better.)
Cameron wouldn't exactly hit cleanup in the Red Sox lineup the way Bay did. He might not even hit sixth or seventh.
But preventing runs is just as important at scoring runs, and Cameron can prevent runs in the outfield with the best of them. Signing Cameron, in fact, might give the Red Sox one of the best defensive outfields in the major leagues -- and if he can hit the ball hard against lefthanded pitching, he might be just the right fit.
J.D. Drew, Jacoby Ellsbury and Jeremy Hermida all are lefthanded hitters -- and that might be a little more lefty-heavy than Theo Epstein or Terry Francona want their outfield to be.
The possibility of a platoon situation, though, remains viable.
That's where Mike Cameron comes into play.
The 36-year-old outfielder almost certainly will not return to Milwaukee now that the Brewers acquired Carlos Gomez from the Twins. Cameron has been a starting outfielder for most of his career -- and an All-Star-caliber outfielder at that -- but his age and the depressed free-agent market means he might not be able to be picky with his next destination.
Boston could be that destination.
Cameron, first and foremost, is a terrific defensive outfielder. His Ultimate Zone Rating (10.0) ranked him 12th in the major leagues last season, and his Fielding Bible Plus-Minus (plus-5) ranked him 16th in the major leagues. A year ago, he had an UZR of 11.3 and a plus-minus of 12.
He'd be a substantial defensive upgrade over Bay, an outfielder who, no matter what his agent says, is well below average at getting to the ball.
But Cameron also is a righthanded hitter with a career OPS of .859 against lefthanded pitching -- something the Red Sox desperately need if they don't bring back Bay. They can't go up against CC Sabathia with four or five lefties in their lineup -- not, at least, if they plan on scoring any runs.
He also probably would enjoy taking aim at the Green Monster, at least as far as his HitTrackerOnline.com home-run chart is concerned:
Cameron is a career center fielder but, given his skills, probably could adapt either to left field or right field. He could platoon with Hermida in left field -- especially on the road, where defense is more of an issue than at Fenway Park. (Hermida has been a below-average outfielder throughout his career.)
He also could spell Drew in right field against lefthanded pitching without costing the Red Sox anything in the way of defense. Here's how it might break down:
Against LHP at home: Cameron LF, Ellsbury CF, Drew RF
(Hermida could spell Drew every once in a while.)
Against RHP at home: Hermida LF, Ellsbury CF, Drew RF
Against LHP on the road: Cameron LF, Ellsbury CF, Drew RF
(Hermida again could spell Drew sometimes.)
Against RHP on the road: Cameron LF, Ellsbury CF, Drew RF
(You could make an argument that Cameron belongs in center field more than Ellsbury given their disparate numbers. According to MLB Trade Rumors, Cameron has professed a desire to play center field with whichever team lands him, and there are those who believe Ellsbury's future lies in left field. But Ellsbury still has all the tools to be an elite center fielder, and if that's what the Red Sox see him being, he needs to keep playing out there to learn how to read the ball off the bat better.)
Cameron wouldn't exactly hit cleanup in the Red Sox lineup the way Bay did. He might not even hit sixth or seventh.
But preventing runs is just as important at scoring runs, and Cameron can prevent runs in the outfield with the best of them. Signing Cameron, in fact, might give the Red Sox one of the best defensive outfields in the major leagues -- and if he can hit the ball hard against lefthanded pitching, he might be just the right fit.
Thursday, November 5, 2009
Why Hermida might not want to unpack too fast
The Red Sox acquired outfielder Jeremy Hermida from the Florida Marlins on Thursday for a relative pittance -- lefty reliever Hunter Jones, who made a couple of cameos with the Red Sox this season, and lefty reliever Jose Alvarez, who had a 4.74 ERA at Single-A Salem this season.
But that doesn't mean Hermida is a lock to go to spring training with the Red Sox -- let alone to play next season at Fenway Park. Among the reasons why:
1. He's a lefthanded hitter
The Red Sox went into September, before roster expansion, with just four outfielders on their 25-man roster: Rocco Baldelli, Jason Bay, J.D. Drew and Jacoby Ellsbury. Baldelli was the fourth outfielder -- and his primary value was as a caddy for Drew against lefthanded pitchers.
Hermida, however, doesn't bring that niche value. Hermida hit .282 against righties last season and a meager .189 against lefties. Hermida provides insurance for the possible departure of Bay, but even if Bay does end up leaving, the three best Red Sox outfielders all would be lefthanded. That's not the type of flexibility Terry Francona usually enjoys.
(Drew didn't miss any extended time this season, and you'd better believe that's in part because the Red Sox gave him regular days off -- something that was easy to do when they were facing a tough lefty. If Baldelli isn't re-signed, the Red Sox almost certainly will be looking for a righthanded hitter who can thrive in a part-time role in right field against lefties.)
2. There isn't a clear roster spot for him
If the Red Sox do sign a righthanded hitting backup outfielder, be it Baldelli or someone else, Hermida suddenly would be competing with Casey Kotchman for a roster spot. Baldelli and Mark Kotsay went into last season as the fourth and fifth Red Sox outfielders, but Kotsay was replaced by Adam LaRoche and LaRoche was replaced by Kotchman.
Unless the Red Sox make a move with Kotchman, they won't able to carry five outfielders on their roster because they'll be carrying too many infielders.
3. He doesn't have to be tendered a contract
The reason the Marlins were so eager to dump Hermida for any little package of prospects was because the outfielder will earn somewhere between $4 million and $5 million in arbitration this fall. (He earned $2.25 million last season.)
Had the Marlins not been able to trade him, though, they likely would have declined to tender him a contract -- something the Red Sox still have the option of doing. If Jason Bay signs -- or even is giving an indication he'll probably sign -- Hermida all of a sudden would become redundant on a roster that already includes Drew, Ellsbury and Kotchman.
Remember how an injury to Baldelli left the Red Sox without a viable righthanded bat off the bench during the playoffs? That's what the roster would look like next spring if Hermida inherits Baldelli's job as its fourth outfielder.
The Red Sox have until Dec. 12 to decide whether to offer contracts to their arbitration-eligible players -- Hermida and Kotchman among them. Maybe they'll let Hermida walk. Maybe they'll let Kotchman walk. Maybe they'll package one or both of them in another trade.
What they've really acquired in exchange for a pair of lefty relievers is a young player with upside and little bit of flexibility with their roster. That's it.
"This was not a blockbuster," Red Sox general manager Theo Epstein said. "This was a value trade, a chance to get a guy with unfulfilled potential for a reasonable cost. I don’t think we can draw grand conclusions about our offseason or the offseason throughout major league baseball based on this one transaction. It’s just a small move."
They've made no commitment to Hermida whatsoever. For all he knows, his Red Sox career might end up being as long and illustrious as that of Andy Marte.
But that doesn't mean Hermida is a lock to go to spring training with the Red Sox -- let alone to play next season at Fenway Park. Among the reasons why:
1. He's a lefthanded hitter
The Red Sox went into September, before roster expansion, with just four outfielders on their 25-man roster: Rocco Baldelli, Jason Bay, J.D. Drew and Jacoby Ellsbury. Baldelli was the fourth outfielder -- and his primary value was as a caddy for Drew against lefthanded pitchers.
Hermida, however, doesn't bring that niche value. Hermida hit .282 against righties last season and a meager .189 against lefties. Hermida provides insurance for the possible departure of Bay, but even if Bay does end up leaving, the three best Red Sox outfielders all would be lefthanded. That's not the type of flexibility Terry Francona usually enjoys.
(Drew didn't miss any extended time this season, and you'd better believe that's in part because the Red Sox gave him regular days off -- something that was easy to do when they were facing a tough lefty. If Baldelli isn't re-signed, the Red Sox almost certainly will be looking for a righthanded hitter who can thrive in a part-time role in right field against lefties.)
2. There isn't a clear roster spot for him
If the Red Sox do sign a righthanded hitting backup outfielder, be it Baldelli or someone else, Hermida suddenly would be competing with Casey Kotchman for a roster spot. Baldelli and Mark Kotsay went into last season as the fourth and fifth Red Sox outfielders, but Kotsay was replaced by Adam LaRoche and LaRoche was replaced by Kotchman.
Unless the Red Sox make a move with Kotchman, they won't able to carry five outfielders on their roster because they'll be carrying too many infielders.
3. He doesn't have to be tendered a contract
The reason the Marlins were so eager to dump Hermida for any little package of prospects was because the outfielder will earn somewhere between $4 million and $5 million in arbitration this fall. (He earned $2.25 million last season.)
Had the Marlins not been able to trade him, though, they likely would have declined to tender him a contract -- something the Red Sox still have the option of doing. If Jason Bay signs -- or even is giving an indication he'll probably sign -- Hermida all of a sudden would become redundant on a roster that already includes Drew, Ellsbury and Kotchman.
Remember how an injury to Baldelli left the Red Sox without a viable righthanded bat off the bench during the playoffs? That's what the roster would look like next spring if Hermida inherits Baldelli's job as its fourth outfielder.
The Red Sox have until Dec. 12 to decide whether to offer contracts to their arbitration-eligible players -- Hermida and Kotchman among them. Maybe they'll let Hermida walk. Maybe they'll let Kotchman walk. Maybe they'll package one or both of them in another trade.
What they've really acquired in exchange for a pair of lefty relievers is a young player with upside and little bit of flexibility with their roster. That's it.
"This was not a blockbuster," Red Sox general manager Theo Epstein said. "This was a value trade, a chance to get a guy with unfulfilled potential for a reasonable cost. I don’t think we can draw grand conclusions about our offseason or the offseason throughout major league baseball based on this one transaction. It’s just a small move."
They've made no commitment to Hermida whatsoever. For all he knows, his Red Sox career might end up being as long and illustrious as that of Andy Marte.
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
Banta-Cain a quiet star on Patriots' defense
Tully Banta-Cain made a brief appearance in the Patriots’ locker room at Gillette Stadium yesterday, sporting a sweatshirt with No. 97 across the front.
Banta-Cain, of course, wears No. 95 on the field. Jarvis Green, who wears No. 97, underwent knee surgery last week and could miss up to a month. And while Banta-Cain might have taken the concept of replacing Green a little too literally, there's something to be said for the way the pass-rushing specialist has fortified the Patriots' front seven so far this season.
Banta-Cain had 43 tackles and 5.5 sacks in the final season of his first go-round with New England, a season that earned him a lucrative free-agent deal with San Francisco. Through seven games this season, he's on an even better pace -- he has 21 tackles and three sacks and, according to ProFootballFocus.com, has been the Patriots' second-best defensive player so far this season.
When the linebacker/defensive end re-signed with the Patriots, most assumed his role would be as a pass-rusher on third down and as a tackler on special teams. Against Tampa Bay a week ago, however, Banta-Cain played 50 of the game's 61 snaps and finished with six tackles and four quarterback hurries, including two hits on the quarterback.
He started the season played defensive end as part of a 4-3 defensive front but has made a seamless transition to outside linebacker as part of a 3-4 defensive front. The two games he's played at outside linebacker, according to ProFootballFocus.com, have been two of his three best games of the season.
"He came into a situation already knowing about the situation when he came back from San Francisco," Patriots defensive coordinator Dean Pees said. "He’s worked really hard. He's prepared very hard. I think he knows what the expectations were coming back here. He knows what Bill (Belichick) wants and what we expect. He adapted so easily because we already all knew him and knew what he could do and what his strengths and weaknesses were."
The burden of replacing Green, of course, won't fall much on Banta-Cain unless the Patriots decide to go back to a four-man defensive line. The likelier scenario is one in which the Patriots plug in Mike Wright at defensive end as part of a three-man front with Ty Warren and Vince Wilfork, giving them maximum flexibility both up front and in their corps of linebackers.
But replacing someone who's not there is something this Patriots defense knows all about. Tedy Bruschi is gone. Rodney Harrison is gone. Richard Seymour is gone. Mike Vrabel is gone. Jerod Mayo even missed three games with a knee injury -- and the Patriots won two of those three games.
There's no extra pressure with Green out of the lineup for the indefinite future. It's just business as usual.
"We put ourselves under a lot of pressure just to be accountable," Wilfork said. "When we step on the field, we want to make sure we play at a high level."
But not many have played at a higher level than Banta-Cain has so far this season.
Banta-Cain, of course, wears No. 95 on the field. Jarvis Green, who wears No. 97, underwent knee surgery last week and could miss up to a month. And while Banta-Cain might have taken the concept of replacing Green a little too literally, there's something to be said for the way the pass-rushing specialist has fortified the Patriots' front seven so far this season.
Banta-Cain had 43 tackles and 5.5 sacks in the final season of his first go-round with New England, a season that earned him a lucrative free-agent deal with San Francisco. Through seven games this season, he's on an even better pace -- he has 21 tackles and three sacks and, according to ProFootballFocus.com, has been the Patriots' second-best defensive player so far this season.
When the linebacker/defensive end re-signed with the Patriots, most assumed his role would be as a pass-rusher on third down and as a tackler on special teams. Against Tampa Bay a week ago, however, Banta-Cain played 50 of the game's 61 snaps and finished with six tackles and four quarterback hurries, including two hits on the quarterback.
He started the season played defensive end as part of a 4-3 defensive front but has made a seamless transition to outside linebacker as part of a 3-4 defensive front. The two games he's played at outside linebacker, according to ProFootballFocus.com, have been two of his three best games of the season.
"He came into a situation already knowing about the situation when he came back from San Francisco," Patriots defensive coordinator Dean Pees said. "He’s worked really hard. He's prepared very hard. I think he knows what the expectations were coming back here. He knows what Bill (Belichick) wants and what we expect. He adapted so easily because we already all knew him and knew what he could do and what his strengths and weaknesses were."
The burden of replacing Green, of course, won't fall much on Banta-Cain unless the Patriots decide to go back to a four-man defensive line. The likelier scenario is one in which the Patriots plug in Mike Wright at defensive end as part of a three-man front with Ty Warren and Vince Wilfork, giving them maximum flexibility both up front and in their corps of linebackers.
But replacing someone who's not there is something this Patriots defense knows all about. Tedy Bruschi is gone. Rodney Harrison is gone. Richard Seymour is gone. Mike Vrabel is gone. Jerod Mayo even missed three games with a knee injury -- and the Patriots won two of those three games.
There's no extra pressure with Green out of the lineup for the indefinite future. It's just business as usual.
"We put ourselves under a lot of pressure just to be accountable," Wilfork said. "When we step on the field, we want to make sure we play at a high level."
But not many have played at a higher level than Banta-Cain has so far this season.
Tuesday, November 3, 2009
Why Steve Neal is the Patriots' first-half MVP
A funny thing happens when opposing teams line up with three defensive linemen in passing situations: None of the rushers ever seem to go up against Stephen Neal.
They attack Matt Light at left tackle. They attack Nick Kaczur at right tackle. They attack Dan Koppen in the middle. They even sometimes go after Logan Mankins at left guard.
But they never seem to go after Neal.
And for good reason, apparently: According to ProFootballFocus.com, a site that breaks down each player each week and awards grades on each play, Neal has been the best offensive guard in the NFL so far this season and, according to their point system, the Patriots' most valuable player on offense or defense.
The leaderboard:
Neal, RG, 17 points
Vince Wilfork, NT, 14.3 points
Tom Brady, QB, 12.5 points
Tully Banta-Cain, OLB, 10.5 points
Nick Kaczur, RT, 6.5 points
"I'm going to have to knock on some wood now," Neal said with a chuckle. "I'm just trying to get out there and practice just as hard as I can and go out there and play as hard as I can. Whatever happens, happens. I can't control it."
A look at the film from the Patriots' game against Denver -- according to the crew at PFF, Neal's best game of the season -- reveals that Neal consistently handled defensive tackles and defensive ends one-on-one. When asked to run-block, he consistently steered his assigned defenders away from the play. When asked to pass-block, he did that, too. He even got out on a couple of screens and threw a key block to spring Sammy Morris for a big gain.
It's tough to measure the effectiveness of offensive linemen without breaking down every play. The PFF crew, though, breaks down every play -- and it gives us a pretty good idea of how the Patriots' offensive linemen stack up across the NFL:
Centers
1. Nick Mangold, Jets: 21.5 points
2. Jake Grove, Dolphins: 12.1 points
3. Shaun O'Hara, Giants, 10.3 points
7. Dan Koppen, Patriots, 6.2 points
Guards
1. Neal, Patriots: 17 points
2. Jahri Evans, Saints: 16.3 points
3. Evan Mathis, Bengals: 14.2 points
35. Logan Mankins, Patriots: minus-0.4 points
(Mankins was charged with a minus-5.2 against Tampa Bay. Four of those negative points were penalty-related.)
Tackles
1. Joe Thomas, Browns: 14.5 points
2. D'Brickashaw Ferguson, Jets: 11.7 points
3. Vernon Carey, Dolphins: 10.1 points
6. Nick Kaczur, Patriots, 6.5 points
(Kaczur has been far from well-rounded: He was credited with a 7.8 on pass-blocking but a minus-1.8 on run-blocking.)
7. Sebastian Vollmer, Patriots, 6.4 points
45. Matt Light, Patriots, minus-3.8
(Light was charged with a minus-4.3 against Baltimore.)
The Patriots have had a terrific offensive line throughout their run of dominance this decade -- and along with Pro Bowler Matt Light, Neal has been a constant throughout.
But this season might be the line's best season yet. Brady has been sacked just eight times through seven games and is on pace for a career-low 18 sacks this season.
"Our job is to block for the running back and to not get the quarterback massacred back there," Neal said. "If we're not doing a good job, we're going to hear about it from you guys -- and everybody. We've got to go out there and do our jobs the best we can. I'm not going to catch any touchdowns, so I've got to block."
They attack Matt Light at left tackle. They attack Nick Kaczur at right tackle. They attack Dan Koppen in the middle. They even sometimes go after Logan Mankins at left guard.
But they never seem to go after Neal.
And for good reason, apparently: According to ProFootballFocus.com, a site that breaks down each player each week and awards grades on each play, Neal has been the best offensive guard in the NFL so far this season and, according to their point system, the Patriots' most valuable player on offense or defense.
The leaderboard:
Neal, RG, 17 points
Vince Wilfork, NT, 14.3 points
Tom Brady, QB, 12.5 points
Tully Banta-Cain, OLB, 10.5 points
Nick Kaczur, RT, 6.5 points
"I'm going to have to knock on some wood now," Neal said with a chuckle. "I'm just trying to get out there and practice just as hard as I can and go out there and play as hard as I can. Whatever happens, happens. I can't control it."
A look at the film from the Patriots' game against Denver -- according to the crew at PFF, Neal's best game of the season -- reveals that Neal consistently handled defensive tackles and defensive ends one-on-one. When asked to run-block, he consistently steered his assigned defenders away from the play. When asked to pass-block, he did that, too. He even got out on a couple of screens and threw a key block to spring Sammy Morris for a big gain.
It's tough to measure the effectiveness of offensive linemen without breaking down every play. The PFF crew, though, breaks down every play -- and it gives us a pretty good idea of how the Patriots' offensive linemen stack up across the NFL:
Centers
1. Nick Mangold, Jets: 21.5 points
2. Jake Grove, Dolphins: 12.1 points
3. Shaun O'Hara, Giants, 10.3 points
7. Dan Koppen, Patriots, 6.2 points
Guards
1. Neal, Patriots: 17 points
2. Jahri Evans, Saints: 16.3 points
3. Evan Mathis, Bengals: 14.2 points
35. Logan Mankins, Patriots: minus-0.4 points
(Mankins was charged with a minus-5.2 against Tampa Bay. Four of those negative points were penalty-related.)
Tackles
1. Joe Thomas, Browns: 14.5 points
2. D'Brickashaw Ferguson, Jets: 11.7 points
3. Vernon Carey, Dolphins: 10.1 points
6. Nick Kaczur, Patriots, 6.5 points
(Kaczur has been far from well-rounded: He was credited with a 7.8 on pass-blocking but a minus-1.8 on run-blocking.)
7. Sebastian Vollmer, Patriots, 6.4 points
45. Matt Light, Patriots, minus-3.8
(Light was charged with a minus-4.3 against Baltimore.)
The Patriots have had a terrific offensive line throughout their run of dominance this decade -- and along with Pro Bowler Matt Light, Neal has been a constant throughout.
But this season might be the line's best season yet. Brady has been sacked just eight times through seven games and is on pace for a career-low 18 sacks this season.
"Our job is to block for the running back and to not get the quarterback massacred back there," Neal said. "If we're not doing a good job, we're going to hear about it from you guys -- and everybody. We've got to go out there and do our jobs the best we can. I'm not going to catch any touchdowns, so I've got to block."
A closer look at Josh Willingham
Last night's look at arbitration-eligible players dredged up a name you have to believe Theo Epstein already is thinking long and hard about: Josh Willingham.
The closer Jason Bay gets to free agency -- if the Yankees close out the Phillies on Wednesday night, he'll be allowed to field offers starting Nov. 19 -- the more likely it is he heads elsewhere. So many teams need a power hitter that there's sure to be plenty of competition; the San Francisco Giants have joined the Seattle Mariners as a logical landing spot for a native of British Columbia who could immediately hit cleanup in either lineup.
(The Giants won 88 games and finished third in the National League West this season with Bengie Molina -- Bengie Molina! -- hitting cleanup in well over two-thirds of their games.)
Epstein already has to be making contingency plans -- and one of his best contingency plans might be Willingham.
You could make an argument, in fact, that the Red Sox might be better off trading Manny Delcarmen and Felix Doubront to the Washington Nationals for Willingham than they would be by signing Bay. Here's why:
1. Money
* Bay almost certainly is going to command a salary of $15 million a season for four seasons, minimum. He'd be 35 years old at the conclusion of a four-year contract -- and, many believe, relegated to duties as a designated hitter.
* Willingham is primed for an arbitration award somewhere in the vicinity of $5 million for next season.
2. Flexibility
* Bay, again, has to be given a commitment of four or five years if he's going to sign on the dotted line.
* Willingham will become a free agent after the 2010 season. The Red Sox then would have more than a few options heading into next winter, including:
--- Going after a free agent like Carl Crawford, Adam Dunn or Jayson Werth.
--- Giving the job to a youngster who's ready for it like Ryan Kalish or Josh Reddick, highly touted prospects who need more seasoning in Triple-A in 2010 but who easily could be factors in 2011.
--- Re-signing Willingham, who is only a few months younger than Bay, to a short-term contract.
3. Value
* Based on Wins Above Replacement, a statistic that measures a player's contribution on offense and defense against an ordinary Triple-A replacement, Bay has contributed 2.9 and 3.4 wins to his teams over the last two seasons -- something FanGraphs calculates as being worth a total of $28.5 million.
* Willingham, during the same span, has contributed 2.4 and 2.3 wins to his teams, something FanGraphs calculates as being worth $21 million.
The choice above is to pay $15 million next season for $14 million worth of production -- or to pay $5 million for $10 million worth of production.
(Oh, and the Red Sox then would have $10 million to spend elsewhere -- perhaps on Chone Figgins to play third base, for example.)
4. Fitting in at Fenway Park
* Bay, of course, loved hitting at Fenway Park. His opposite-field power cost him some home runs to right-center field, but he certainly took advantage of the Green Monster.
* Willingham, though, looks like he'll love hitting at Fenway Park, too. Check out his home-run charts from the past two seasons:
2009
2008
That, my friends, is a hitter who would love the Green Monster.
5. Fitting in away from Fenway Park
Epstein spoke last month of the need to balance out his team, to find hitters who hit on the road as well as at home. Willingham OPS'ed .753 at home a year ago and .962 on the road; for his career, Willingham has a .772 OPS in home games and a .902 OPS on the road.
The closer Jason Bay gets to free agency -- if the Yankees close out the Phillies on Wednesday night, he'll be allowed to field offers starting Nov. 19 -- the more likely it is he heads elsewhere. So many teams need a power hitter that there's sure to be plenty of competition; the San Francisco Giants have joined the Seattle Mariners as a logical landing spot for a native of British Columbia who could immediately hit cleanup in either lineup.
(The Giants won 88 games and finished third in the National League West this season with Bengie Molina -- Bengie Molina! -- hitting cleanup in well over two-thirds of their games.)
Epstein already has to be making contingency plans -- and one of his best contingency plans might be Willingham.
You could make an argument, in fact, that the Red Sox might be better off trading Manny Delcarmen and Felix Doubront to the Washington Nationals for Willingham than they would be by signing Bay. Here's why:
1. Money
* Bay almost certainly is going to command a salary of $15 million a season for four seasons, minimum. He'd be 35 years old at the conclusion of a four-year contract -- and, many believe, relegated to duties as a designated hitter.
* Willingham is primed for an arbitration award somewhere in the vicinity of $5 million for next season.
2. Flexibility
* Bay, again, has to be given a commitment of four or five years if he's going to sign on the dotted line.
* Willingham will become a free agent after the 2010 season. The Red Sox then would have more than a few options heading into next winter, including:
--- Going after a free agent like Carl Crawford, Adam Dunn or Jayson Werth.
--- Giving the job to a youngster who's ready for it like Ryan Kalish or Josh Reddick, highly touted prospects who need more seasoning in Triple-A in 2010 but who easily could be factors in 2011.
--- Re-signing Willingham, who is only a few months younger than Bay, to a short-term contract.
3. Value
* Based on Wins Above Replacement, a statistic that measures a player's contribution on offense and defense against an ordinary Triple-A replacement, Bay has contributed 2.9 and 3.4 wins to his teams over the last two seasons -- something FanGraphs calculates as being worth a total of $28.5 million.
* Willingham, during the same span, has contributed 2.4 and 2.3 wins to his teams, something FanGraphs calculates as being worth $21 million.
The choice above is to pay $15 million next season for $14 million worth of production -- or to pay $5 million for $10 million worth of production.
(Oh, and the Red Sox then would have $10 million to spend elsewhere -- perhaps on Chone Figgins to play third base, for example.)
4. Fitting in at Fenway Park
* Bay, of course, loved hitting at Fenway Park. His opposite-field power cost him some home runs to right-center field, but he certainly took advantage of the Green Monster.
* Willingham, though, looks like he'll love hitting at Fenway Park, too. Check out his home-run charts from the past two seasons:
2009
2008
That, my friends, is a hitter who would love the Green Monster.
5. Fitting in away from Fenway Park
Epstein spoke last month of the need to balance out his team, to find hitters who hit on the road as well as at home. Willingham OPS'ed .753 at home a year ago and .962 on the road; for his career, Willingham has a .772 OPS in home games and a .902 OPS on the road.
Monday, November 2, 2009
Capps, Hardy, Uggla, Willingham among intriguing non-tender candidates
(Three days after this was posted, the Red Sox acquired Jeremy Hermida. Go figure.)
Six weeks remain until the Dec. 12 deadline for teams to tender contracts to their arbitration-eligible players. As ESPN.com's Buster Olney detailed over the weekend, more than a few players will become free agents when their teams decline to tender them contracts in order to save upwards of $5 million.
And the pool of players might be better than you'd think. Reliever Takashi Saito was not tendered a contract by the Dodgers a year ago, for example, and he eventually signed an incentive-laden contract that earned him a season-long job in the Red Sox bullpen.
But the Red Sox don't have to wait until Dec. 12 to pounce. With the way arbitration drives up salaries, teams might be open to trading players who will start to see their salaries climb in the next year or two. (Even the Red Sox will be in this mindset with first baseman Casey Kotchman, a bench player in Boston who nonetheless will be in line for a paycheck around $4 million if he goes to arbitration this season.)
Among the players the Red Sox might consider inquiring about during the next six weeks or so:
Garrett Atkins, 1B/3B, Colorado ($7.05 million last season): Atkins will turn 30 in December and has seen his OPS tumble in each of the last four seasons -- from .965 in 2006 to .853 in 2007 to .780 in 2008 to .650 in 2009. He hit just nine home runs in almost 400 plate appearances this season and appears to have lost his job to youngster Ian Stewart.
Atkins' approach at the plate -- he's seen at least 3.9 pitches per plate appearance in two of his last three seasons and swings at pitches out of the strike zone at a clip well below the major-league average -- once seemed to make him a fit for the Red Sox. But the presence of Casey Kotchman and Mike Lowell make Atkins redundant, so it would take an accompanying move to make Atkins a worthwhile acquisition.
Matt Capps, RP, Pittsburgh ($2.3 million last season): The Pirates might not want to pay a closer who put up a 5.80 ERA a year ago -- especially since arbitrators love saves, and Capps had 27 of them last season. But that might be to the benefit of a team that still remembers the 2.28 and 3.02 ERAs Capps put up in the two years previous.
Capps saw his opponents' batting average on balls in play jump by almost 100 points a year ago -- from .268 to .364 -- a jump that's almost certainly unsustainable. The jump in his ratio of home runs per fly ball -- from 6.8 percent to 13.5 pecent -- might be fluky, too.
What might be cause for concern, though, is the fact that his strikeout-to-walk ratio fell from 7.80 two seasons ago to 2.71 last season.
He wouldn't be a closer with the Red Sox the way he is with the Pirates, but it's not hard to envision the 26-year-old as a useful bullpen arm -- perhaps filling the same role Saito did.
J.J. Hardy, SS, Milwaukee ($4.65 million last season): The Brewers shipped Hardy to Triple-A Nashville this season with his batting average down at .229 and his on-base percentage at .300. It was easily the worst season for a 26-year-old shortstop who hit 31 doubles and 24 home runs a year ago as part of an .821 OPS.
In some ways, it could be considered fluky: His .260 batting average on balls in play last season was 45 points lower than it was two years ago.
In other ways, it could be considered a fair result: His line-drive rate dropped to a career-low 13 percent, meaning he wasn't hitting the ball as hard as he did in the past. His strikeout rate also climbed to a career-high 18.3 percent, and while his walk rate climbed, too, it didn't quite keep pace.
The Red Sox can't go into next season depending on Jed Lowrie to stay healthy and play shortstop. With as much as the door has revolved at that position, however, the risk of trading for Hardy might be too much.
Jeremy Hermida, OF, Florida ($2.25 million last season): At one time a highly touted prospect, the star of Hermida seems to have lost his luster. He did, however, seem to get back on track a little bit -- he cut down his strikeout-to-walk ratio and boosted his line-drive percentage a season ago. He also has tremendous pitch-per-at-bat numbers -- numbers that climbed to a career-best 4.21 a season ago. Had he qualified -- he had 491 plate appearances, just missing the cutoff -- he would have ranked eighth in the National League in that category.
Like Hardy, he's still young: He doesn't turn 26 until January, meaning it's too early to give up on him as a worthwhile major-league player.
The biggest downside: Hermida is a lefthanded hitter, and if Rocco Baldelli should sign elsewhere, leaving the Red Sox without their best fourth outfielder, they'll almost certainly be in the market for a righthanded hitter to spell J.D. Drew and Jacoby Ellsbury.
Dan Uggla, 2B, Florida ($5.35 million last season): You can read more here, but here's the gist:
* He has OPS'ed over .800 in each of his first four seasons;
* His strikeout-to-walk ratio has dropped in each of the last three seasons;
* His batting average dropped to .243 this season, a career low, but his on-base percentage almost held steady -- and his batting average on balls in play dropped by 50 points, a sign he ran into some bad luck;
* He played third base in the minor leagues almost as much as he played second base.
If the Red Sox decide to jettison Mike Lowell or to play him more at designated hitter than at third base, Uggla could be an intriguing option.
Josh Willingham, LF, Washington ($2.95 million last season): It's not that Willingham would be a spectacular alternative to Jason Bay. But should the Red Sox's left fielder depart via free agency, they could do worse as a replacement -- while upgrading elsewhere, of course -- than Willingham.
For one thing, Willingham is a righthanded hitter and would balance out the lefty-heavy Red Sox lineup. For another thing, the 30-year-old has the type of plate approach the Red Sox like to see: His strikeout-to-walk ratio is below the major-league average, and he consistently sees more than four pitches per plate appearance.
His power is almost purely to left field, meaning that the Green Monster might do wonders for a slugging percentage that already was close to .500 last season.
Six weeks remain until the Dec. 12 deadline for teams to tender contracts to their arbitration-eligible players. As ESPN.com's Buster Olney detailed over the weekend, more than a few players will become free agents when their teams decline to tender them contracts in order to save upwards of $5 million.
And the pool of players might be better than you'd think. Reliever Takashi Saito was not tendered a contract by the Dodgers a year ago, for example, and he eventually signed an incentive-laden contract that earned him a season-long job in the Red Sox bullpen.
But the Red Sox don't have to wait until Dec. 12 to pounce. With the way arbitration drives up salaries, teams might be open to trading players who will start to see their salaries climb in the next year or two. (Even the Red Sox will be in this mindset with first baseman Casey Kotchman, a bench player in Boston who nonetheless will be in line for a paycheck around $4 million if he goes to arbitration this season.)
Among the players the Red Sox might consider inquiring about during the next six weeks or so:
Garrett Atkins, 1B/3B, Colorado ($7.05 million last season): Atkins will turn 30 in December and has seen his OPS tumble in each of the last four seasons -- from .965 in 2006 to .853 in 2007 to .780 in 2008 to .650 in 2009. He hit just nine home runs in almost 400 plate appearances this season and appears to have lost his job to youngster Ian Stewart.
Atkins' approach at the plate -- he's seen at least 3.9 pitches per plate appearance in two of his last three seasons and swings at pitches out of the strike zone at a clip well below the major-league average -- once seemed to make him a fit for the Red Sox. But the presence of Casey Kotchman and Mike Lowell make Atkins redundant, so it would take an accompanying move to make Atkins a worthwhile acquisition.
Matt Capps, RP, Pittsburgh ($2.3 million last season): The Pirates might not want to pay a closer who put up a 5.80 ERA a year ago -- especially since arbitrators love saves, and Capps had 27 of them last season. But that might be to the benefit of a team that still remembers the 2.28 and 3.02 ERAs Capps put up in the two years previous.
Capps saw his opponents' batting average on balls in play jump by almost 100 points a year ago -- from .268 to .364 -- a jump that's almost certainly unsustainable. The jump in his ratio of home runs per fly ball -- from 6.8 percent to 13.5 pecent -- might be fluky, too.
What might be cause for concern, though, is the fact that his strikeout-to-walk ratio fell from 7.80 two seasons ago to 2.71 last season.
He wouldn't be a closer with the Red Sox the way he is with the Pirates, but it's not hard to envision the 26-year-old as a useful bullpen arm -- perhaps filling the same role Saito did.
J.J. Hardy, SS, Milwaukee ($4.65 million last season): The Brewers shipped Hardy to Triple-A Nashville this season with his batting average down at .229 and his on-base percentage at .300. It was easily the worst season for a 26-year-old shortstop who hit 31 doubles and 24 home runs a year ago as part of an .821 OPS.
In some ways, it could be considered fluky: His .260 batting average on balls in play last season was 45 points lower than it was two years ago.
In other ways, it could be considered a fair result: His line-drive rate dropped to a career-low 13 percent, meaning he wasn't hitting the ball as hard as he did in the past. His strikeout rate also climbed to a career-high 18.3 percent, and while his walk rate climbed, too, it didn't quite keep pace.
The Red Sox can't go into next season depending on Jed Lowrie to stay healthy and play shortstop. With as much as the door has revolved at that position, however, the risk of trading for Hardy might be too much.
Jeremy Hermida, OF, Florida ($2.25 million last season): At one time a highly touted prospect, the star of Hermida seems to have lost his luster. He did, however, seem to get back on track a little bit -- he cut down his strikeout-to-walk ratio and boosted his line-drive percentage a season ago. He also has tremendous pitch-per-at-bat numbers -- numbers that climbed to a career-best 4.21 a season ago. Had he qualified -- he had 491 plate appearances, just missing the cutoff -- he would have ranked eighth in the National League in that category.
Like Hardy, he's still young: He doesn't turn 26 until January, meaning it's too early to give up on him as a worthwhile major-league player.
The biggest downside: Hermida is a lefthanded hitter, and if Rocco Baldelli should sign elsewhere, leaving the Red Sox without their best fourth outfielder, they'll almost certainly be in the market for a righthanded hitter to spell J.D. Drew and Jacoby Ellsbury.
Dan Uggla, 2B, Florida ($5.35 million last season): You can read more here, but here's the gist:
* He has OPS'ed over .800 in each of his first four seasons;
* His strikeout-to-walk ratio has dropped in each of the last three seasons;
* His batting average dropped to .243 this season, a career low, but his on-base percentage almost held steady -- and his batting average on balls in play dropped by 50 points, a sign he ran into some bad luck;
* He played third base in the minor leagues almost as much as he played second base.
If the Red Sox decide to jettison Mike Lowell or to play him more at designated hitter than at third base, Uggla could be an intriguing option.
Josh Willingham, LF, Washington ($2.95 million last season): It's not that Willingham would be a spectacular alternative to Jason Bay. But should the Red Sox's left fielder depart via free agency, they could do worse as a replacement -- while upgrading elsewhere, of course -- than Willingham.
For one thing, Willingham is a righthanded hitter and would balance out the lefty-heavy Red Sox lineup. For another thing, the 30-year-old has the type of plate approach the Red Sox like to see: His strikeout-to-walk ratio is below the major-league average, and he consistently sees more than four pitches per plate appearance.
His power is almost purely to left field, meaning that the Green Monster might do wonders for a slugging percentage that already was close to .500 last season.
Saturday, October 31, 2009
Myron Pryor emerges as a force
Vince Wilfork played each of the Patriots' first four defensive snaps against Tampa Bay last Sunday, doing what he normally does in the middle of the defensive line. When a rush for no gain set up a third-and-4, Wilfork headed for the sidelines to make way for rookie Myron Pryor.
It was Pryor, then, and not Wilfork, who was right in the middle of the defensive line when quarterback Josh Johnson unloaded a hurried pass -- a pass intercepted and returned for a touchdown by safety Brandon Meriweather.
The Patriots drafted Pryor in the sixth round of April's draft, making him the 207th player selected overall. More than half of the players drafted in the sixth round in April -- 19 of the 36, to be specific -- have yet to make an appearance in an NFL game. Pryor, who was the third-to-last pick in the sixth round, played last week as the Patriots' primary third-down nose tackle and backup to Pro Bowler Vince Wilfork.
Wilfork hasn't played nose tackle much on third down all season. The Patriots have kept him off the field on third down quite a bit all year in part to play to his strengths and in part to keep him fresh. Where they haven't been as consistent, though, is how they've replaced him on those snaps. It's interesting, in fact, to see who's replaced him on the Patriots' first third-down defensive snap in their last three games:
Broncos: Mike Wright lined up between Tully Banta-Cain and Derrick Burgess as the Patriots played three defensive linemen and six defensive backs;
Titans: Wilfork lined up alongside Pryor between Banta-Cain and Burgess as the Patriots went with four defensive linemen and five defensive backs;
Buccaneers: Pryor lined up between Banta-Cain and Burgess as the Patriots went with three defensive linemen and six defensive backs.
Wright has the versatility to play anywhere along the Patriots' defensive line and took most of the snaps at nose tackle on third down earlier this season -- especially back when the Patriots were playing primarily a 4-3 defense. When Wilfork sat down on third downs earlier this season, it often was Wright who took his spot in a nickel or dime defense. The fifth-year veteran had his best game against the Baltimore Ravens, finishing with two sacks and two quarterback hurries in a game in which Wilfork still seemed to be limited by his ankle injury.
The play of Wright was no small factor in the impressive first month the Patriots' defense enjoyed.
But Wright didn't see nearly as much time against Tampa Bay as he had earlier in the season. Pryor seemed to be usurping his snaps. Let's piggyback off the work of ESPNBoston's Mike Reiss by breaking down the defensive snaps per game of Pryor and Wright since the season began:
Bills: Wright 18 snaps, Pryor 0 (inactive)
Jets: Wright 51, Pryor 3
Falcons: Pryor 27, Wright 26
(That was the game in which Wilfork injured his ankle; Pryor played every snap at nose tackle in the aftermath of the Wilfork injury.)
Ravens: Wright 38, Pryor 19
Broncos: Wright 58, Pryor 28
Titans: Wright 27, Pryor 24
Buccaneers: Pryor 26, Wright 15
Oh, and wouldn't you know it: The game in London was the first game in which Pryor had a positive ProFootballFocus.com rating. (Note to self: Do a little more research on the way ProFootballFocus.com hands out its ratings before using it too extensively.)
The Tampa Bay game could be an anomaly. But while Belichick doesn't like to hint at the way his depth chart stacks up, his division of labor doesn't lie. Pryor is light years ahead of second-round draft pick Ron Brace and seems to be turning into just the third-down nose tackle to fit the Patriots' defensive scheme.
With the next month a make-or-break month for the Patriots' dreams of a first-round bye in the playoffs, it'll be very interesting to see how much the Patriots' rookie nose tackle can keep progressing.
It was Pryor, then, and not Wilfork, who was right in the middle of the defensive line when quarterback Josh Johnson unloaded a hurried pass -- a pass intercepted and returned for a touchdown by safety Brandon Meriweather.
The Patriots drafted Pryor in the sixth round of April's draft, making him the 207th player selected overall. More than half of the players drafted in the sixth round in April -- 19 of the 36, to be specific -- have yet to make an appearance in an NFL game. Pryor, who was the third-to-last pick in the sixth round, played last week as the Patriots' primary third-down nose tackle and backup to Pro Bowler Vince Wilfork.
Wilfork hasn't played nose tackle much on third down all season. The Patriots have kept him off the field on third down quite a bit all year in part to play to his strengths and in part to keep him fresh. Where they haven't been as consistent, though, is how they've replaced him on those snaps. It's interesting, in fact, to see who's replaced him on the Patriots' first third-down defensive snap in their last three games:
Broncos: Mike Wright lined up between Tully Banta-Cain and Derrick Burgess as the Patriots played three defensive linemen and six defensive backs;
Titans: Wilfork lined up alongside Pryor between Banta-Cain and Burgess as the Patriots went with four defensive linemen and five defensive backs;
Buccaneers: Pryor lined up between Banta-Cain and Burgess as the Patriots went with three defensive linemen and six defensive backs.
Wright has the versatility to play anywhere along the Patriots' defensive line and took most of the snaps at nose tackle on third down earlier this season -- especially back when the Patriots were playing primarily a 4-3 defense. When Wilfork sat down on third downs earlier this season, it often was Wright who took his spot in a nickel or dime defense. The fifth-year veteran had his best game against the Baltimore Ravens, finishing with two sacks and two quarterback hurries in a game in which Wilfork still seemed to be limited by his ankle injury.
The play of Wright was no small factor in the impressive first month the Patriots' defense enjoyed.
But Wright didn't see nearly as much time against Tampa Bay as he had earlier in the season. Pryor seemed to be usurping his snaps. Let's piggyback off the work of ESPNBoston's Mike Reiss by breaking down the defensive snaps per game of Pryor and Wright since the season began:
Bills: Wright 18 snaps, Pryor 0 (inactive)
Jets: Wright 51, Pryor 3
Falcons: Pryor 27, Wright 26
(That was the game in which Wilfork injured his ankle; Pryor played every snap at nose tackle in the aftermath of the Wilfork injury.)
Ravens: Wright 38, Pryor 19
Broncos: Wright 58, Pryor 28
Titans: Wright 27, Pryor 24
Buccaneers: Pryor 26, Wright 15
Oh, and wouldn't you know it: The game in London was the first game in which Pryor had a positive ProFootballFocus.com rating. (Note to self: Do a little more research on the way ProFootballFocus.com hands out its ratings before using it too extensively.)
The Tampa Bay game could be an anomaly. But while Belichick doesn't like to hint at the way his depth chart stacks up, his division of labor doesn't lie. Pryor is light years ahead of second-round draft pick Ron Brace and seems to be turning into just the third-down nose tackle to fit the Patriots' defensive scheme.
With the next month a make-or-break month for the Patriots' dreams of a first-round bye in the playoffs, it'll be very interesting to see how much the Patriots' rookie nose tackle can keep progressing.
Thursday, October 29, 2009
Bye week gives Patriots a chance to self-scout
The Patriots will sit down this week and go over film the way they always do, looking for tendencies, looking for weaknesses, looking at anything that can become an advantage if exploited. It might be a coverage scheme in the secondary. It might be a blocking scheme on the offensive line. It might be a formation on special teams. The Patriots, as they do every week, will pore through the film in search of any scrap of useful information they can find.
Oh, and they'll be looking at their next opponent, too.
Apart from rest -- Gary Guyton and Wes Welker said they were headed back to Georgia and Oklahoma, respectively, after practice -- the bye week gives the Patriots a chance to do some self-scouting based on the first seven games of the season.
Every team looks for tendencies in its opponent, so the Patriots this week will take a look at their own tendencies. Plays are called based on countless factors -- down, distance, field position, side of the field, anticipated defensive alignment -- and it would be easy for a team to fall into patterns in certain situations. The Patriots might discover, for example, that they almost always run to the left when they're on the right hash mark in a short-yardage situation, and that's a tendency an opponent might pick up on.
"Every good team has tendencies," Patriots coach Bill Belichick said. "If you look out there and look at any team in football and basketball and hockey, there's certain things they do, and if they're a good team, they probably do them well. ... I don't think tendencies are necessarily a bad thing, but there's a point where you want to have balance and be able to do things to complement them."
The Patriots are getting a head start on Miami -- particularly the defense of the Dolphins' Wildcat package that has given them so much trouble. But the bye week gives the Patriots' coaching staff a couple of days to look at themselves as an opponent would, to try to figure out where they've become too predictable in the early going.
If the Dolphins -- or the Colts or Jets or Saints, for that matter -- expect a blitz on defensive third-and-longs or a draw out of the shotgun on offensive third-and-longs, it's going to be far easier for them to stop those plays.
"Defensively, is our tendency to blitz in a certain situation or play Cover 1 or Cover 5 or stunt in a certain situation?" Belichick said. "If we're seeing that, our opponents are seeing that. Again, it might be something that we say, 'OK, but that's where we want to be. We're OK with that.' There also might be a feeling that, 'This is getting a little too predictable.'"
That can be done both through statistical analysis and film analysis. It's impossible to take one without the other given the small sample size involved and the myriad factors that go into the success or failure of each play. The rout against Tennessee in the snow, for example, almost has to be tossed out entirely -- there's no telling whether some of those pass plays would have worked if the Titans hadn't had to worry about the snow.
The Patriots can run spreadsheet after spreadsheet with statistical compilations from specific situations, too, and see what they all yield. Maybe they're surrending 4.5 yards per play when they blitz but 5.3 yards per play when they don't blitz, for example. (Those numbers are completely imaginary.) But if a wide-open receiver drops a pass in the end zone, well, that doesn't mean the blitz was a good idea.
"It's looking at all the plays," Belichick said, "looking at all the third-and-3-to-5s, the third-and-6-to-10s, the short yardages, all of the times we were in Cover 3, all the runs against Cover 3, all the passes against Cover 3, all the play-action against Cover 3, all the empty (backfield) plays. Actually seeing them is always a little more valuable than doing a statistical look -- although that's a good starting point and, a lot of times, it'll trigger something. ...
"You look it and say, 'We had a lot of production on these plays, but it's a little misleading -- they had some missed tackles, and, really, it wasn't that good.' There's other things that statistically don't look good, but you actually look them and say, 'We're on the right track here. If we'd just made this block or if we hadn't got that play called back with a penalty, if this guy hadn't slipped, we would have been productive there.' There's no substitute for actually seeing the play, seeing the film."
Oh, and they'll be looking at their next opponent, too.
Apart from rest -- Gary Guyton and Wes Welker said they were headed back to Georgia and Oklahoma, respectively, after practice -- the bye week gives the Patriots a chance to do some self-scouting based on the first seven games of the season.
Every team looks for tendencies in its opponent, so the Patriots this week will take a look at their own tendencies. Plays are called based on countless factors -- down, distance, field position, side of the field, anticipated defensive alignment -- and it would be easy for a team to fall into patterns in certain situations. The Patriots might discover, for example, that they almost always run to the left when they're on the right hash mark in a short-yardage situation, and that's a tendency an opponent might pick up on.
"Every good team has tendencies," Patriots coach Bill Belichick said. "If you look out there and look at any team in football and basketball and hockey, there's certain things they do, and if they're a good team, they probably do them well. ... I don't think tendencies are necessarily a bad thing, but there's a point where you want to have balance and be able to do things to complement them."
The Patriots are getting a head start on Miami -- particularly the defense of the Dolphins' Wildcat package that has given them so much trouble. But the bye week gives the Patriots' coaching staff a couple of days to look at themselves as an opponent would, to try to figure out where they've become too predictable in the early going.
If the Dolphins -- or the Colts or Jets or Saints, for that matter -- expect a blitz on defensive third-and-longs or a draw out of the shotgun on offensive third-and-longs, it's going to be far easier for them to stop those plays.
"Defensively, is our tendency to blitz in a certain situation or play Cover 1 or Cover 5 or stunt in a certain situation?" Belichick said. "If we're seeing that, our opponents are seeing that. Again, it might be something that we say, 'OK, but that's where we want to be. We're OK with that.' There also might be a feeling that, 'This is getting a little too predictable.'"
That can be done both through statistical analysis and film analysis. It's impossible to take one without the other given the small sample size involved and the myriad factors that go into the success or failure of each play. The rout against Tennessee in the snow, for example, almost has to be tossed out entirely -- there's no telling whether some of those pass plays would have worked if the Titans hadn't had to worry about the snow.
The Patriots can run spreadsheet after spreadsheet with statistical compilations from specific situations, too, and see what they all yield. Maybe they're surrending 4.5 yards per play when they blitz but 5.3 yards per play when they don't blitz, for example. (Those numbers are completely imaginary.) But if a wide-open receiver drops a pass in the end zone, well, that doesn't mean the blitz was a good idea.
"It's looking at all the plays," Belichick said, "looking at all the third-and-3-to-5s, the third-and-6-to-10s, the short yardages, all of the times we were in Cover 3, all the runs against Cover 3, all the passes against Cover 3, all the play-action against Cover 3, all the empty (backfield) plays. Actually seeing them is always a little more valuable than doing a statistical look -- although that's a good starting point and, a lot of times, it'll trigger something. ...
"You look it and say, 'We had a lot of production on these plays, but it's a little misleading -- they had some missed tackles, and, really, it wasn't that good.' There's other things that statistically don't look good, but you actually look them and say, 'We're on the right track here. If we'd just made this block or if we hadn't got that play called back with a penalty, if this guy hadn't slipped, we would have been productive there.' There's no substitute for actually seeing the play, seeing the film."
Does Cliff Lee remind you of anyone?
Check out Cliff Lee's pitch chart from his Game 1 win:
Does that remind you of anyone else you know? Doesn't it look a little bit like a mirror image of this pitch chart?
(What you're looking at, since it's been a little while, is the horizontal movement of each pitch graphed against its velocity, a chart that makes it pretty easy to distinguish a four-pitch repertoire of a fastball, changeup, curveball and slider. Pitcher B has a faster fastball and a slower changeup, but the two otherwise are almost exact mirror images -- a lefty and a righty with virtually the same arsenal.)
Even the spin magnitude chart -- a chart this writer only sort of understands -- makes the two look like mirror images. Here's Lee:
And here's the other guy:
Cliff Lee had a 5.43 ERA in his first full season in the major leagues, winning 14 games as a 25-year-old but struggling mightily the whole way. A year later, at the age of 26, he won 18 games and posted a respectable 3.79 ERA -- including a stretch in which he had a 2.36 ERA across eight starts.
Three years after that, at the age of 29, he posted a 2.54 ERA and won the American League's Cy Young Award. A night ago, he struck out 10 and walked no one in a complete-game victory in Game 1 of the World Series.
That sounds like just the type of pitcher the Red Sox would love.
No wonder they've been so reluctant to trade Clay Buchholz.
(Thanks, as always, to Dan Brooks.)
Does that remind you of anyone else you know? Doesn't it look a little bit like a mirror image of this pitch chart?
(What you're looking at, since it's been a little while, is the horizontal movement of each pitch graphed against its velocity, a chart that makes it pretty easy to distinguish a four-pitch repertoire of a fastball, changeup, curveball and slider. Pitcher B has a faster fastball and a slower changeup, but the two otherwise are almost exact mirror images -- a lefty and a righty with virtually the same arsenal.)
Even the spin magnitude chart -- a chart this writer only sort of understands -- makes the two look like mirror images. Here's Lee:
And here's the other guy:
Cliff Lee had a 5.43 ERA in his first full season in the major leagues, winning 14 games as a 25-year-old but struggling mightily the whole way. A year later, at the age of 26, he won 18 games and posted a respectable 3.79 ERA -- including a stretch in which he had a 2.36 ERA across eight starts.
Three years after that, at the age of 29, he posted a 2.54 ERA and won the American League's Cy Young Award. A night ago, he struck out 10 and walked no one in a complete-game victory in Game 1 of the World Series.
That sounds like just the type of pitcher the Red Sox would love.
No wonder they've been so reluctant to trade Clay Buchholz.
(Thanks, as always, to Dan Brooks.)
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
Tate gets in, doesn't miss a beat
It's hard to overstate how impressive it was that Brandon Tate played the way he did on Sunday.
Football is almost as much about scheme and system as it is about talent. Sure, the best players can thrive on pure athletic ability, but for most players -- particularly wide receivers, whose job is to be where their quarterback expects them to be -- flawless execution of plays is just as important as any 40-yard dash time.
Tate didn't participate in minicamps during the summer. Tate didn't participate in training camp in August and September. Tate didn't participate in any of the team's first six games. Tate didn't even participate in practice until last Wednesday -- and that was his first football action of any kind since he'd torn up his knee returning a punt with North Carolina more than a year ago.
All he'd done was sit in the film room and do as much studying as he possibly could.
"I've put myself in some of the other guys' shoes," Tate said, "and when the coach talks to them, I make it seem like he's talking to me, too."
But film can't compare to the real thing. He experienced the real thing for the first time on Sunday against the Tampa Bay Buccaneers -- and it wasn't just in a limited role, either. With the Patriots' corps of wide receivers depleted by ineffectiveness and injury, Tate had to step right in as the team's fourth wide receiver.
"It's faster than college, I know that," he said. "Everybody's bigger, and everybody knows their assignments. You've got to go out there and run your route the right way and be crisp on everything."
Tate didn't catch any passes against the Bucs on Sunday. (He was the target when Brady threw his second interception of the game.) But the first time he took the field in an NFL game, he took an end-around handoff from Tom Brady and rushed for an 11-yard gain behind the blocks of tight end Ben Watson and wide receiver Sam Aiken. He also returned a kickoff for 22 yards -- something he'll likely do more and more as the season progresses.
"That felt real good, man," Tate said. "I ain't been out there on the field for so long -- and the trip to London was also big for me, too. I just soaked it all in and enjoyed it."
He now has a week of practice under his belt and an NFL game on film that he and his coaches can critique. Even better, he has nine more games to demonstrate why the Patriots considered him a steal when they snatched him up in the third round of the draft.
"I'll just keep on trying to get better in practice," he said. "It starts in practice -- I'll just go out there and work hard and get better and better."
Football is almost as much about scheme and system as it is about talent. Sure, the best players can thrive on pure athletic ability, but for most players -- particularly wide receivers, whose job is to be where their quarterback expects them to be -- flawless execution of plays is just as important as any 40-yard dash time.
Tate didn't participate in minicamps during the summer. Tate didn't participate in training camp in August and September. Tate didn't participate in any of the team's first six games. Tate didn't even participate in practice until last Wednesday -- and that was his first football action of any kind since he'd torn up his knee returning a punt with North Carolina more than a year ago.
All he'd done was sit in the film room and do as much studying as he possibly could.
"I've put myself in some of the other guys' shoes," Tate said, "and when the coach talks to them, I make it seem like he's talking to me, too."
But film can't compare to the real thing. He experienced the real thing for the first time on Sunday against the Tampa Bay Buccaneers -- and it wasn't just in a limited role, either. With the Patriots' corps of wide receivers depleted by ineffectiveness and injury, Tate had to step right in as the team's fourth wide receiver.
"It's faster than college, I know that," he said. "Everybody's bigger, and everybody knows their assignments. You've got to go out there and run your route the right way and be crisp on everything."
Tate didn't catch any passes against the Bucs on Sunday. (He was the target when Brady threw his second interception of the game.) But the first time he took the field in an NFL game, he took an end-around handoff from Tom Brady and rushed for an 11-yard gain behind the blocks of tight end Ben Watson and wide receiver Sam Aiken. He also returned a kickoff for 22 yards -- something he'll likely do more and more as the season progresses.
"That felt real good, man," Tate said. "I ain't been out there on the field for so long -- and the trip to London was also big for me, too. I just soaked it all in and enjoyed it."
He now has a week of practice under his belt and an NFL game on film that he and his coaches can critique. Even better, he has nine more games to demonstrate why the Patriots considered him a steal when they snatched him up in the third round of the draft.
"I'll just keep on trying to get better in practice," he said. "It starts in practice -- I'll just go out there and work hard and get better and better."
Jason Bay's agent off base
"The only defensive statistic that I know for sure that is easily measurable is outfield assists and errors committed, and Jason is just the third outfielder in major league history to lead the league in outfield assists while not creating an error all season, the last guy being Carl Yastrzemski. It used to be that those statistics were enough. In baseball we all need a better evaluation of defensive ability but the defensive metrics we have out there are so debatable, and in most cases proprietary, that it is hard to quantify a player’s ability to play defense."
-- Joe Urbon, Jason Bay's agent
It's hard to believe Theo Epstein did anything but start chuckling when he read the salvo from Joe Urbon, the agent representing Jason Bay this offseason, in an interview with WEEI.
No one questions the way Jason Bay hits -- and if the Red Sox offered him a four- or five-year deal, they wouldn't expect the way he hits to decline much over the course of that contract.
His fielding, however, is another story.
Bay finished this season with an OPS+ of 132 -- second-best among Red Sox hitters and 12th-best in the American League, according to Baseball-Reference.com. According to FanGraphs' Wins Above Replacement statistic, however, Bay ranked fourth among Red Sox position players and 32nd in the American League.
The reason? His defense.
Among the 29 qualified outfielders in the major leagues, Bay ranked 25th in Ultimate Zone Rating (according to FanGraphs) and 23rd in The Fielding Bible's plus-minus system (according to BillJamesOnline.com). Not since 2006, in fact, has Bay recorded a plus-minus or an UZR better than 0 -- in other words, better than average.
"It’s a surprise,” Urbon told WEEI. "I think that most people who evaluate for a living, their reaction is that that is not true. All I can go by are comments by his teammates and others who have seen him play day in and day out. Obviously the only comparison we have as a Red Sox is to Manny and that’s probably not favorable to Jason, really. But the feedback I’ve gotten from evaluators is that he plays that position as well as anybody they’ve seen, and that was really from Day 1 or Week 1 coming in and playing left field at Fenway back at the trade deadline last year."
(We'll ignore the contradiction there: He implies that Manny Ramirez played left field at Fenway Park better than Bay did and then says that Bay plays that position as well as anybody.)
Here's part of the issue: Baseball is still coming around on advanced statistical measures. (Here's a Sports Illustrated story from this spring that describes the revolution as well as anyone has.) Many talent evaluators -- and, just as importantly, many players -- still believe in the idea that the player with the fewest errors is the best defensive player.
"I don’t think anybody really believes in that stuff," Red Sox second baseman Dustin Pedroia told this writer back in May. "I don’t really know how they do that. My biggest focus is, if the ball is hit to me, pick it up and throw it and get an out. You don’t need zone ratings or anything like that to tell who’s a good defensive player and who’s not. You can pretty much look out on the field and tell who can play defense and who can’t."
Bay, of course, comes out at the top of the heap in the most widely accepted statistical measures: Errors and fielding percentage. Bay finished this season with zero errors -- fewer than David Ortiz, even -- and a fielding percentage of 1.000. No player in the major leagues -- at any position -- handled as many chances as Bay without flubbing at least one.
But there's a fundamental issue with that measurement when you're evaluating outfielders: An outfielder only can be charged with an error if he gets to a ball -- and the worst outfielders aren't going to get to as many balls. Even if an outfielder almost gets to a ball but allows it to glance off his glove, he often won't be charged with an error. The only way to guarantee the official scorer will hang an error on an outfielder is if a throw gets away and allows a runner to move up a base.
Jason Bay can throw. Jason Bay might not have the world's strongest throwing arm, but it's certainly accurate: Only Houston's Hunter Pence finished the season with more outfield assists (16) than Bay (15). Urbon certainly isn't lying when he cites statistics that show Bay's arm being both accurate and reliable.
But arm doesn't tell the whole story. It barely tells half the story. The best outfielders are the ones that chase down fly balls in every direction -- and Bay just doesn't have the ability to do that. The Fielding Bible awarded him a plus-1 on shallow fly balls and a plus-6 on medium fly balls but an abysmal minus-14 on deep fly balls.
Some uncertainty exists about how much the Green Monster hurts Bay in his statistical measures, about whether balls that hit 10 feet up on the wall count against him or not. John Dewan, the creator of the plus-minus metric, claimed in a forum on the Sons of Sam Horn message board that his system includes a park adjustment named for Ramirez, its primary beneficiary during his years with the Red Sox.
But Bay had a minus-19 in his final full season with the Pirates in 2007 and a minus-11 in 2008, a season in which he spent four months in Pittsburgh and two months in Boston. As he gets older -- he turned 31 in September -- his range inevitably will decline.
"Let’s not over-focus on the defense," Urbon told WEEI. "We used to not focus on defense at all as a free agent. Now it seems like that’s all we’re focusing on, and there has to be a reason for it."
There is: When a team is being asked to shell out $15 million a year for four or five years, the type of numbers Bay's camp presumably is throwing out there, that player had better be more than a one-dimensional threat. Bay might be a tremendous hitter and an even better guy in the clubhouse, but if he's going to have to be a designated hitter by 2011 or 2012, well, he might not be worth the type of money he wants.
-- Joe Urbon, Jason Bay's agent
It's hard to believe Theo Epstein did anything but start chuckling when he read the salvo from Joe Urbon, the agent representing Jason Bay this offseason, in an interview with WEEI.
No one questions the way Jason Bay hits -- and if the Red Sox offered him a four- or five-year deal, they wouldn't expect the way he hits to decline much over the course of that contract.
His fielding, however, is another story.
Bay finished this season with an OPS+ of 132 -- second-best among Red Sox hitters and 12th-best in the American League, according to Baseball-Reference.com. According to FanGraphs' Wins Above Replacement statistic, however, Bay ranked fourth among Red Sox position players and 32nd in the American League.
The reason? His defense.
Among the 29 qualified outfielders in the major leagues, Bay ranked 25th in Ultimate Zone Rating (according to FanGraphs) and 23rd in The Fielding Bible's plus-minus system (according to BillJamesOnline.com). Not since 2006, in fact, has Bay recorded a plus-minus or an UZR better than 0 -- in other words, better than average.
"It’s a surprise,” Urbon told WEEI. "I think that most people who evaluate for a living, their reaction is that that is not true. All I can go by are comments by his teammates and others who have seen him play day in and day out. Obviously the only comparison we have as a Red Sox is to Manny and that’s probably not favorable to Jason, really. But the feedback I’ve gotten from evaluators is that he plays that position as well as anybody they’ve seen, and that was really from Day 1 or Week 1 coming in and playing left field at Fenway back at the trade deadline last year."
(We'll ignore the contradiction there: He implies that Manny Ramirez played left field at Fenway Park better than Bay did and then says that Bay plays that position as well as anybody.)
Here's part of the issue: Baseball is still coming around on advanced statistical measures. (Here's a Sports Illustrated story from this spring that describes the revolution as well as anyone has.) Many talent evaluators -- and, just as importantly, many players -- still believe in the idea that the player with the fewest errors is the best defensive player.
"I don’t think anybody really believes in that stuff," Red Sox second baseman Dustin Pedroia told this writer back in May. "I don’t really know how they do that. My biggest focus is, if the ball is hit to me, pick it up and throw it and get an out. You don’t need zone ratings or anything like that to tell who’s a good defensive player and who’s not. You can pretty much look out on the field and tell who can play defense and who can’t."
Bay, of course, comes out at the top of the heap in the most widely accepted statistical measures: Errors and fielding percentage. Bay finished this season with zero errors -- fewer than David Ortiz, even -- and a fielding percentage of 1.000. No player in the major leagues -- at any position -- handled as many chances as Bay without flubbing at least one.
But there's a fundamental issue with that measurement when you're evaluating outfielders: An outfielder only can be charged with an error if he gets to a ball -- and the worst outfielders aren't going to get to as many balls. Even if an outfielder almost gets to a ball but allows it to glance off his glove, he often won't be charged with an error. The only way to guarantee the official scorer will hang an error on an outfielder is if a throw gets away and allows a runner to move up a base.
Jason Bay can throw. Jason Bay might not have the world's strongest throwing arm, but it's certainly accurate: Only Houston's Hunter Pence finished the season with more outfield assists (16) than Bay (15). Urbon certainly isn't lying when he cites statistics that show Bay's arm being both accurate and reliable.
But arm doesn't tell the whole story. It barely tells half the story. The best outfielders are the ones that chase down fly balls in every direction -- and Bay just doesn't have the ability to do that. The Fielding Bible awarded him a plus-1 on shallow fly balls and a plus-6 on medium fly balls but an abysmal minus-14 on deep fly balls.
Some uncertainty exists about how much the Green Monster hurts Bay in his statistical measures, about whether balls that hit 10 feet up on the wall count against him or not. John Dewan, the creator of the plus-minus metric, claimed in a forum on the Sons of Sam Horn message board that his system includes a park adjustment named for Ramirez, its primary beneficiary during his years with the Red Sox.
But Bay had a minus-19 in his final full season with the Pirates in 2007 and a minus-11 in 2008, a season in which he spent four months in Pittsburgh and two months in Boston. As he gets older -- he turned 31 in September -- his range inevitably will decline.
"Let’s not over-focus on the defense," Urbon told WEEI. "We used to not focus on defense at all as a free agent. Now it seems like that’s all we’re focusing on, and there has to be a reason for it."
There is: When a team is being asked to shell out $15 million a year for four or five years, the type of numbers Bay's camp presumably is throwing out there, that player had better be more than a one-dimensional threat. Bay might be a tremendous hitter and an even better guy in the clubhouse, but if he's going to have to be a designated hitter by 2011 or 2012, well, he might not be worth the type of money he wants.
You must double-team Vince Wilfork
(Note: Wilfork was among the players absence from the portion of practice open to the media on Wednesday. Veterans like Randy Moss and Junior Seau likewise were absent, and with the weather miserable and the team on a bye week, the possibility of a veterans' day off can't be discounted.)
It's sometimes hard to measure the impact of Vince Wilfork.
The 325-pound nose tackle has just 19 tackles on the season, a total that ranks him ninth on his team. He has forced one fumble and has been credited with just two pass break-ups. Against Tampa Bay on Sunday, Wilfork was credited with two solo tackles and not much else. On the stat sheet, at least, he hasn't exactly been the most prolific defensive player on the field.
But there's a reason Wilfork earned a Pro Bowl nod two years ago and might earn another one this year. He still, as they say, commands attention from two offensive linemen most of the time he takes the field.
How much of that translates into actual impact, though? It's sometimes tough to tell. Let's go back to the tape and take a look at how Tampa Bay blocked Wilfork -- and what sort of impact the nose tackle was able to make in spite of that blocking:
* Wilfork played 20 snaps in the first half and was double-teamed -- two offensive linemen at least put a hand on him -- 12 times;
* Four of Tampa Bay's five offensive linemen was matched up against him at least once;
* Center Jeff Faine had to deal with him 15 times, and left guard Jeremy Zuttah had to deal with him 11 times -- and the two double-teamed him eight times;
* Wilfork beat Faine one-on-one in the second quarter and drew a chop-block penalty on running back Derrick Ward;
* On his next snap, on the Bucs' next possession, Wilfork again shed Faine in time to bat down a Josh Johnson pass;
* Only twice in the first half did Tampa Bay run the ball without double-teaming Wilfork -- once when Wilfork lined up as the right end in a 3-4 formation and once on a run that gained only a yard;
* Wilfork had both of his two first-half tackles out of double-teams, including a stop for no gain deep in Bucs' territory.
(Rookie Myron Pryor, by the way, played nose tackle in third-down and long-yardage situations thoughout the game and commanded a few double-teams by himself. The Patriots even left Wilfork on the sidelines on a third-and-1 play in favor of Pryor and Mike Wright -- and they got the stop. The rookie has made tremendous progress in the middle of the line and looks like an emerging force.)
Wilfork played only four snaps in the second half; with the score out of hand and the Buccaners needing to throw the ball downfield to have any chance, Pryor did most of the work on the interior of the defensive line. But here's how those four snaps went:
* First and 10: Wilfork lined up as the defensive end on the right side of a 3-4 and got double-teamed by the left tackle and left guard, allowing Tully Banta-Cain to get in behind him and pressure the quarterback into an incompletion;
* Second and 10: On the next play, the center was the only blocker on Wilfork -- and Wilfork got the first hit on the running back before Jerod Mayo dropped him for no gain;
* First and 10: Wilfork again lined up as the defensive end on the right side and beat the left tackle so clean he drew a holding penalty;
* First and 10: The center and the left guard double-teamed him and took him out of the play on what would be an incomplete pass.
To tally that one up: Wilfork in the second half was single-blocked twice and double-blocked twice -- and he still managed to get in on the play on three of those four snaps.
It's sometimes hard to measure the impact of Vince Wilfork.
The 325-pound nose tackle has just 19 tackles on the season, a total that ranks him ninth on his team. He has forced one fumble and has been credited with just two pass break-ups. Against Tampa Bay on Sunday, Wilfork was credited with two solo tackles and not much else. On the stat sheet, at least, he hasn't exactly been the most prolific defensive player on the field.
But there's a reason Wilfork earned a Pro Bowl nod two years ago and might earn another one this year. He still, as they say, commands attention from two offensive linemen most of the time he takes the field.
How much of that translates into actual impact, though? It's sometimes tough to tell. Let's go back to the tape and take a look at how Tampa Bay blocked Wilfork -- and what sort of impact the nose tackle was able to make in spite of that blocking:
* Wilfork played 20 snaps in the first half and was double-teamed -- two offensive linemen at least put a hand on him -- 12 times;
* Four of Tampa Bay's five offensive linemen was matched up against him at least once;
* Center Jeff Faine had to deal with him 15 times, and left guard Jeremy Zuttah had to deal with him 11 times -- and the two double-teamed him eight times;
* Wilfork beat Faine one-on-one in the second quarter and drew a chop-block penalty on running back Derrick Ward;
* On his next snap, on the Bucs' next possession, Wilfork again shed Faine in time to bat down a Josh Johnson pass;
* Only twice in the first half did Tampa Bay run the ball without double-teaming Wilfork -- once when Wilfork lined up as the right end in a 3-4 formation and once on a run that gained only a yard;
* Wilfork had both of his two first-half tackles out of double-teams, including a stop for no gain deep in Bucs' territory.
(Rookie Myron Pryor, by the way, played nose tackle in third-down and long-yardage situations thoughout the game and commanded a few double-teams by himself. The Patriots even left Wilfork on the sidelines on a third-and-1 play in favor of Pryor and Mike Wright -- and they got the stop. The rookie has made tremendous progress in the middle of the line and looks like an emerging force.)
Wilfork played only four snaps in the second half; with the score out of hand and the Buccaners needing to throw the ball downfield to have any chance, Pryor did most of the work on the interior of the defensive line. But here's how those four snaps went:
* First and 10: Wilfork lined up as the defensive end on the right side of a 3-4 and got double-teamed by the left tackle and left guard, allowing Tully Banta-Cain to get in behind him and pressure the quarterback into an incompletion;
* Second and 10: On the next play, the center was the only blocker on Wilfork -- and Wilfork got the first hit on the running back before Jerod Mayo dropped him for no gain;
* First and 10: Wilfork again lined up as the defensive end on the right side and beat the left tackle so clean he drew a holding penalty;
* First and 10: The center and the left guard double-teamed him and took him out of the play on what would be an incomplete pass.
To tally that one up: Wilfork in the second half was single-blocked twice and double-blocked twice -- and he still managed to get in on the play on three of those four snaps.
Monday, October 26, 2009
A proposal: Restricted free agency
(Consumer warning: This is long and possibly tedious, but if you're as fascinated by baseball's offseason as baseball's season, you might find it at least a little interesting.)
Baseball's salary ladder makes at least a little bit of sense at both of its extremes.
Young players are at the whim of their employer for three seasons, a system that rewards teams that draft and develop their own players and affords small-market teams a measure of financial flexibility.
Veteran players, on the other hand, as close to an open market as there is: They can sign contracts worth as much and for however many years as they can get, and they can benefit from periods of prosperity just as much as they can be hurt by periods of paucity. (Alex Rodriguez and Bobby Abreu represent the polar opposites on this scale.)
In the middle, though, players are subject to the whims not of the market but of to the whims of a three-person panel of arbitrators, professional dispute specialists who may or may not be experts on baseball and what it is that makes baseball players valuable. What it really does, though, is artifically supress player salaries for an extra three seasons in order to keep players tied to their original teams for a little bit longer.
Jonathan Papelbon will be the most high-profile Red Sox player to go to -- or, at least, to get close to -- salary arbitration. But Manny Delcarmen, Nick Green, Casey Kotchman and Ramon Ramirez likewise are eligible to have their salaries determined by an independent arbitrator, and whether that's good or bad depends more on their service time than on their ability to play baseball.
Baseball's collective bargaining agreement expires at the end of the 2011 season -- at which point the owners almost certainly will have to discuss the luxury tax and other ways to minimize payroll disparity across the game. That, though, would tend to drive down player salaries, and the players' association would have to get a concession or two from the owners in exchange.
Here's an idea: Restricted free agency. Read on.
I. Arbitrators value "primitive" statistics.
If you're a fan of saves, you're going to love arbitration. Check out some of these arbitration paradoxes from last season (with official major-league service time -- in years and days -- in parentheses, thanks to Cot's Baseball Contracts):
* Jose Valverde (5.090): $8 million
* Jonathan Papelbon (3.064): $6.25 million
* Bobby Jenks (3.090): $5.6 million
* Huston Street (4.000): $4.5 million
* Kevin Gregg (5.002): $4.2 million
* Felix Hernandez (3.060): $3.8 million
* Justin Verlander (3.002): $3.625 million
Let's re-rank that last list in order of Wins Above Replacement -- a Baseball Prospectus and FanGraphs statistic -- for each of those pitchers in 2008, the season before that particular arbitration award:
* Hernandez, 3.9
* Verlander, 3.3
* Papelbon, 3.0
* Jenks, 1.3
* Street, 1.2
* Valverde, 0.8
* Gregg, 0.7
The Wins Above Replacement statistic puts into context how valuable a player is by measuring how many fewer wins his team would have -- using runs created or runs allowed -- if his roster spot had been filled by an average player called up from Triple-A.
Starting pitchers inherently are more valuable than relief pitchers simply because they throw more innings. That's why the Red Sox tried to hard to make Papelbon a starting pitcher and why it's hard to believe they've dismissed the idea of making Daniel Bard a starting pitcher. A pretty decent starting pitcher is worth far more than even the best relief pitcher.
Mariano Rivera, the greatest relief pitcher the game has ever seen, is earning the same $15 million salary per year as Derek Lowe -- and Rivera even pitches for the Yankees. Joe Nathan signed a contract extension with the Minnesota Twins that will pay him a little more than $11 million next season; in other words, he'll make less than what Kevin Millwood will make next season.
Rivera led all full-time relievers in WAR in 2008 -- but when relief pitchers were lumped in with starting pitchers, Rivera ranked 42nd behind, among others, Hiroki Kuroda and Scott Baker. Even as disappointing as Verlander was a year ago -- it's easy to forget now that he had a 4.84 ERA, his worst as a major leaguer -- his Wins Above Replacement ranked him ahead of Rivera.
With the history of the arbitration process as their guide, however, both Hernandez and Verlander had to settle for a salary less than half that of Valverde pretty much only because Valverde had 44 saves last season.
(None of the three actually went before an arbitrator -- but if either Hernandez or Verlander believed he could get significantly more money than he got, based on precedent, he'd have made sure there was a hearing.)
II. Arbitration gets the whole idea of compensation backwards.
Contracts should not be about what a player has done. He's already been paid for what he has done. It's about what a player will do that year and in the years ahead.
In theory, of course, young players get better each year and thus receive a greater salary each year. Still, though, teams make arbitration arguments based on what each player did the previous season as compared to other players -- and not based on what he ought to be expected to do the next season. The panel, in fact, considers the player's "contribution to the club" -- meaning what he's done in previous seasons -- and disregards projected contribution.
When teams bid on free agents, on the other hand, they're doing so based on the production they expect to receive. This is why Mark Teixeira (.919 career OPS entering this season) and Bobby Abreau (.902 career OPS entering this season) received such disparate contract offers. The Yankees expected the 29-year-old Teixeira to keep putting up an OPS of .900 or 1.000 for the next six or seven seasons. The Angels weren't sure they could expect the 35-year-old Abreu to produce the same way he had earlier in his career.
Teixeira, of course, signed an eight-year contract with the Yankees worth $180 million. Abreu signed a one-year contract with the Angels worth $5 million because no one would offer him anything better. That's how they were valued in the free market -- and, thus, that's a pretty accurate reflection of how valuable teams in baseball saw them.
You can bet an arbitrator would have seen things differently.
III. Arbitration overvalues service time.
When the panel hears a case, it is allowed to consider as basis for comparison "the salaries of comparable players in his service-time class and, for players with less than five years of service, the class one year ahead of him."
That means that while Hernandez is right up there with Roy Halladay as one of the best pitchers in the American League, based on service time, the arbitrator can't use Halladay as a basis for comparison.
He can, however, look at Brian Bruney, Zach Duke and John Maine -- so at least there's that.
IV. There are no market forces at play in arbitration. (There's a reason the word "arbitrary" comes from the same origin.)
Xavier Nady landed a $6.55 million contract from the Yankees last January, a raise of almost $3 million on his previous salary. It wasn't as if someone else was competing for his services. The reason the two sides settled on $6.55 million was because it seemed close to what an arbitrator might have awarded, anyway, based as much on the history of the process as on Nady's actual value as a player.
Oh, and Los Angeles' Andre Ethier, a player almost certainly valued more highly than Nady in every major-league front office, settled for just over $2 million.
That's the inherent issue with arbitration: In almost every other profession, the compensation of a company's best employees is based on his market value -- in other words, he or she is paid enough so another company won't steal them away. (This is why every major company in the world pays its CEO what seems to be an exorbitant salary. No rule forces them to do so. It's a matter of value.)
San Francisco's Tim Lincecum is eligible for arbitration this winter -- and there's a pretty good chance he'll be coming off back-to-back Cy Young Awards when he does so. It's unprecedented. There's no way an arbitrator could look at past history and decide what a two-time Cy Young Award winner with just three years of service time is worth.
Owners and general managers, though, have to have an idea of how the market values certain players. They can get a sense for how much Lincecum would be worth on the open market. Something is only worth, after all, as much as someone is willing to pay for it -- and for Lincecum to get the salary he deserves, more teams have to have the opportunity to buy.
V. Restricted free agency is the solution
Here's the setup: After three seasons under team control, a player becomes eligible for restricted free agency. Any team could offer the player a contract for the next season, and the player's original team would retain a right to first refusal -- much like in the NBA and the NHL.
Let's go back to Lincecum again. If restricted free agency was in play, you can bet the Red Sox -- and several other teams -- would jump at the chance to offer Lincecum $15 million or more, a number with which the Giants couldn't compete.
One could argue that Lincecum, as perhaps the best pitcher in the National League, deserves $15 million or more. But in an effort to give small-market teams a chance to hold onto their players for more than three seasons, here's a compromise as part of the proposal:
* For a player with fewer than four seasons of service time, the original team needs only to match 50 percent of the new team's offer.
* For a player with fewer than five seasons of service time, the original team needs only to match 75 percent of the new team's offer.
* For a player with fewer than six seasons of service time, the original team needs only to match 100 percent of the new team's offer.
If the Yankees were willing to offer Lincecum $20 million, for example, the Giants would only have to pony up $10 million to retain him. A year from now, if the Yankees were willing to offer Lincecum $20 million, the Giants would have to pony up $15 million.
And if the Giants chose to let Lincecum go, the Yankees would be on the hook for the $20 million they'd offered -- plus some sort of draft-pick compensation to be sent to the Giants.
Because fans tend not to want to see excessive team-hopping, though, there's one more stipulation to include: If the Yankees landed Lincecum for that $20 million salary, they'd be committed to him at that salary for each of his remaining arbitration-eligible -- or, in this case, RFA-eligible -- seasons. Lincecum in effect would be signing a three-year contract worth $60 million and would hit the open market at the same time he normally would.
Take Papelbon as another example. The Red Sox likely are going to owe Papelbon $8 or $9 million next season either because of the decision of an arbitrator or because the two parties come to an agreement that's driven by what they anticipate from a hearing. But what if there's another team that values Papelbon more than the Red Sox? What if there's a team that would be willing to pay $15 million a season for Papelbon? Shouldn't he be able to earn that type of money if there's someone willing to pay him?
Then again, if every other team shared a common view that Papelbon walked a tightrope last season that he won't survive this season, maybe none of them would offer more than $6 or $7 million. The Red Sox then could retain him at a salary more reflective of his market value.
(Imagine how fascinating it would be for the Yankees tried to decide how much to offer Papelbon in an effort to increase the cost for the Red Sox without offering so much that the Red Sox just let him go for a salary they wouldn't want to absorb -- especially with Rivera still under contract for $15 million next season.)
An arbitrator shouldn't decide what players are worth to baseball teams. Baseball teams should decide what players are worth to baseball teams. Restricted free agency isn't perfect, but the more you can put market forces into play, the more you're going to ensure that the best players earn the highest salaries and that the smartest teams wind up with the most cost-effective players.
Baseball's salary ladder makes at least a little bit of sense at both of its extremes.
Young players are at the whim of their employer for three seasons, a system that rewards teams that draft and develop their own players and affords small-market teams a measure of financial flexibility.
Veteran players, on the other hand, as close to an open market as there is: They can sign contracts worth as much and for however many years as they can get, and they can benefit from periods of prosperity just as much as they can be hurt by periods of paucity. (Alex Rodriguez and Bobby Abreu represent the polar opposites on this scale.)
In the middle, though, players are subject to the whims not of the market but of to the whims of a three-person panel of arbitrators, professional dispute specialists who may or may not be experts on baseball and what it is that makes baseball players valuable. What it really does, though, is artifically supress player salaries for an extra three seasons in order to keep players tied to their original teams for a little bit longer.
Jonathan Papelbon will be the most high-profile Red Sox player to go to -- or, at least, to get close to -- salary arbitration. But Manny Delcarmen, Nick Green, Casey Kotchman and Ramon Ramirez likewise are eligible to have their salaries determined by an independent arbitrator, and whether that's good or bad depends more on their service time than on their ability to play baseball.
Baseball's collective bargaining agreement expires at the end of the 2011 season -- at which point the owners almost certainly will have to discuss the luxury tax and other ways to minimize payroll disparity across the game. That, though, would tend to drive down player salaries, and the players' association would have to get a concession or two from the owners in exchange.
Here's an idea: Restricted free agency. Read on.
I. Arbitrators value "primitive" statistics.
If you're a fan of saves, you're going to love arbitration. Check out some of these arbitration paradoxes from last season (with official major-league service time -- in years and days -- in parentheses, thanks to Cot's Baseball Contracts):
* Jose Valverde (5.090): $8 million
* Jonathan Papelbon (3.064): $6.25 million
* Bobby Jenks (3.090): $5.6 million
* Huston Street (4.000): $4.5 million
* Kevin Gregg (5.002): $4.2 million
* Felix Hernandez (3.060): $3.8 million
* Justin Verlander (3.002): $3.625 million
Let's re-rank that last list in order of Wins Above Replacement -- a Baseball Prospectus and FanGraphs statistic -- for each of those pitchers in 2008, the season before that particular arbitration award:
* Hernandez, 3.9
* Verlander, 3.3
* Papelbon, 3.0
* Jenks, 1.3
* Street, 1.2
* Valverde, 0.8
* Gregg, 0.7
The Wins Above Replacement statistic puts into context how valuable a player is by measuring how many fewer wins his team would have -- using runs created or runs allowed -- if his roster spot had been filled by an average player called up from Triple-A.
Starting pitchers inherently are more valuable than relief pitchers simply because they throw more innings. That's why the Red Sox tried to hard to make Papelbon a starting pitcher and why it's hard to believe they've dismissed the idea of making Daniel Bard a starting pitcher. A pretty decent starting pitcher is worth far more than even the best relief pitcher.
Mariano Rivera, the greatest relief pitcher the game has ever seen, is earning the same $15 million salary per year as Derek Lowe -- and Rivera even pitches for the Yankees. Joe Nathan signed a contract extension with the Minnesota Twins that will pay him a little more than $11 million next season; in other words, he'll make less than what Kevin Millwood will make next season.
Rivera led all full-time relievers in WAR in 2008 -- but when relief pitchers were lumped in with starting pitchers, Rivera ranked 42nd behind, among others, Hiroki Kuroda and Scott Baker. Even as disappointing as Verlander was a year ago -- it's easy to forget now that he had a 4.84 ERA, his worst as a major leaguer -- his Wins Above Replacement ranked him ahead of Rivera.
With the history of the arbitration process as their guide, however, both Hernandez and Verlander had to settle for a salary less than half that of Valverde pretty much only because Valverde had 44 saves last season.
(None of the three actually went before an arbitrator -- but if either Hernandez or Verlander believed he could get significantly more money than he got, based on precedent, he'd have made sure there was a hearing.)
II. Arbitration gets the whole idea of compensation backwards.
Contracts should not be about what a player has done. He's already been paid for what he has done. It's about what a player will do that year and in the years ahead.
In theory, of course, young players get better each year and thus receive a greater salary each year. Still, though, teams make arbitration arguments based on what each player did the previous season as compared to other players -- and not based on what he ought to be expected to do the next season. The panel, in fact, considers the player's "contribution to the club" -- meaning what he's done in previous seasons -- and disregards projected contribution.
When teams bid on free agents, on the other hand, they're doing so based on the production they expect to receive. This is why Mark Teixeira (.919 career OPS entering this season) and Bobby Abreau (.902 career OPS entering this season) received such disparate contract offers. The Yankees expected the 29-year-old Teixeira to keep putting up an OPS of .900 or 1.000 for the next six or seven seasons. The Angels weren't sure they could expect the 35-year-old Abreu to produce the same way he had earlier in his career.
Teixeira, of course, signed an eight-year contract with the Yankees worth $180 million. Abreu signed a one-year contract with the Angels worth $5 million because no one would offer him anything better. That's how they were valued in the free market -- and, thus, that's a pretty accurate reflection of how valuable teams in baseball saw them.
You can bet an arbitrator would have seen things differently.
III. Arbitration overvalues service time.
When the panel hears a case, it is allowed to consider as basis for comparison "the salaries of comparable players in his service-time class and, for players with less than five years of service, the class one year ahead of him."
That means that while Hernandez is right up there with Roy Halladay as one of the best pitchers in the American League, based on service time, the arbitrator can't use Halladay as a basis for comparison.
He can, however, look at Brian Bruney, Zach Duke and John Maine -- so at least there's that.
IV. There are no market forces at play in arbitration. (There's a reason the word "arbitrary" comes from the same origin.)
Xavier Nady landed a $6.55 million contract from the Yankees last January, a raise of almost $3 million on his previous salary. It wasn't as if someone else was competing for his services. The reason the two sides settled on $6.55 million was because it seemed close to what an arbitrator might have awarded, anyway, based as much on the history of the process as on Nady's actual value as a player.
Oh, and Los Angeles' Andre Ethier, a player almost certainly valued more highly than Nady in every major-league front office, settled for just over $2 million.
That's the inherent issue with arbitration: In almost every other profession, the compensation of a company's best employees is based on his market value -- in other words, he or she is paid enough so another company won't steal them away. (This is why every major company in the world pays its CEO what seems to be an exorbitant salary. No rule forces them to do so. It's a matter of value.)
San Francisco's Tim Lincecum is eligible for arbitration this winter -- and there's a pretty good chance he'll be coming off back-to-back Cy Young Awards when he does so. It's unprecedented. There's no way an arbitrator could look at past history and decide what a two-time Cy Young Award winner with just three years of service time is worth.
Owners and general managers, though, have to have an idea of how the market values certain players. They can get a sense for how much Lincecum would be worth on the open market. Something is only worth, after all, as much as someone is willing to pay for it -- and for Lincecum to get the salary he deserves, more teams have to have the opportunity to buy.
V. Restricted free agency is the solution
Here's the setup: After three seasons under team control, a player becomes eligible for restricted free agency. Any team could offer the player a contract for the next season, and the player's original team would retain a right to first refusal -- much like in the NBA and the NHL.
Let's go back to Lincecum again. If restricted free agency was in play, you can bet the Red Sox -- and several other teams -- would jump at the chance to offer Lincecum $15 million or more, a number with which the Giants couldn't compete.
One could argue that Lincecum, as perhaps the best pitcher in the National League, deserves $15 million or more. But in an effort to give small-market teams a chance to hold onto their players for more than three seasons, here's a compromise as part of the proposal:
* For a player with fewer than four seasons of service time, the original team needs only to match 50 percent of the new team's offer.
* For a player with fewer than five seasons of service time, the original team needs only to match 75 percent of the new team's offer.
* For a player with fewer than six seasons of service time, the original team needs only to match 100 percent of the new team's offer.
If the Yankees were willing to offer Lincecum $20 million, for example, the Giants would only have to pony up $10 million to retain him. A year from now, if the Yankees were willing to offer Lincecum $20 million, the Giants would have to pony up $15 million.
And if the Giants chose to let Lincecum go, the Yankees would be on the hook for the $20 million they'd offered -- plus some sort of draft-pick compensation to be sent to the Giants.
Because fans tend not to want to see excessive team-hopping, though, there's one more stipulation to include: If the Yankees landed Lincecum for that $20 million salary, they'd be committed to him at that salary for each of his remaining arbitration-eligible -- or, in this case, RFA-eligible -- seasons. Lincecum in effect would be signing a three-year contract worth $60 million and would hit the open market at the same time he normally would.
Take Papelbon as another example. The Red Sox likely are going to owe Papelbon $8 or $9 million next season either because of the decision of an arbitrator or because the two parties come to an agreement that's driven by what they anticipate from a hearing. But what if there's another team that values Papelbon more than the Red Sox? What if there's a team that would be willing to pay $15 million a season for Papelbon? Shouldn't he be able to earn that type of money if there's someone willing to pay him?
Then again, if every other team shared a common view that Papelbon walked a tightrope last season that he won't survive this season, maybe none of them would offer more than $6 or $7 million. The Red Sox then could retain him at a salary more reflective of his market value.
(Imagine how fascinating it would be for the Yankees tried to decide how much to offer Papelbon in an effort to increase the cost for the Red Sox without offering so much that the Red Sox just let him go for a salary they wouldn't want to absorb -- especially with Rivera still under contract for $15 million next season.)
An arbitrator shouldn't decide what players are worth to baseball teams. Baseball teams should decide what players are worth to baseball teams. Restricted free agency isn't perfect, but the more you can put market forces into play, the more you're going to ensure that the best players earn the highest salaries and that the smartest teams wind up with the most cost-effective players.
Sunday, October 25, 2009
Patriots get out the bag of tricks
"The Patriots want to blitz," Phil Simms said early in the CBS broadcast of the New England-Tampa Bay game on Sunday, "and they want to put pressure on the quarterback and they want to put pressure on the short routes."
But the Patriots hadn't blitzed. All season long, with Jerod Mayo and without, the Patriots hadn't blitzed. They'd done some shifting between a 4-3 formation and a 3-4 formation while mixing in some nickel and dime, but they'd mostly stayed home and avoided the creative gambles that for so long was the hallmark of Bill Belichick defenses. Against Denver two weeks ago, with the Broncos' "Wild Horses" offense causing all sorts of problems, the Patriots did almost nothing but stay at home in their base defensive packages -- and Kyle Orton picked them apart.
On Sunday, though, the Patriots blitzed. They blitzed corners off the edge. They blitzed safeties up the middle. They blitzed linebackers from just about everywhere. They didn't blitz too much -- by the count of this reporter, they blitzed on 13 of their 36 defensive snaps in the first half -- but they blitzed enough to keep young quarterback Josh Johnson looking over his shoulder.
And while it didn't make much of a difference against the woeful Buccaneers, who would have lost big no matter what, it did demonstrate that it did demonstrate that the Patriots' new-look defense still is capable of executing the same complex defensive packages as its predecessors.
Here's a look at how the Patriots distributed their blitzes in the first half before the score started to get out of hand:
* Brandon McGowan blitzed four times;
* Jonathan Wilhite blitzed three times;
* Adalius Thomas -- remember him? -- blitzed three times;
* Wilhite and McGowan blitzed at the same time twice, including on the interception that Brandon Meriweather returned for a touchdown;
* Gary Guyton blitzed twice;
* Meriweather blitzed once, doing so in tandem with Thomas;
* Jerod Mayo blitzed once;
* Patrick Chung blitzed once;
* Leigh Bodden blitzed once.
And that's just the first half.
Oh, and the Patriots frequently lined up Tully Banta-Cain and Derrick Burgess at defensive end, flanking Vince Wilfork and Ty Warren, and both Banta-Cain and Burgess are at their best when they're going after the quarterback.
The result?
* Thomas had a quarterback hurry;
* Banta-Cain had two tackles for a loss;
* Chung had a sack and a quarterback hurry;
* Guyton had a tackle for a loss and a quarterback hurry;
* Mike Wright had a sack and a quarterback hurry;
* Myron Pryor had a quarterback hurry and a tackle for a loss;
* McGowan, Meriweather and bodden each broke up two passes.
The Patriots will face the Dolphins at Gillette Stadium in two weeks, a team that sparked the Wildcat revolution across the NFL. The Patriots weren't able to deal with the "Wild Horses" offense the Broncos threw at them, eschewing creativity in favor of conservatism.
It'll be interesting to see if they do the same against Miami.
But the Patriots hadn't blitzed. All season long, with Jerod Mayo and without, the Patriots hadn't blitzed. They'd done some shifting between a 4-3 formation and a 3-4 formation while mixing in some nickel and dime, but they'd mostly stayed home and avoided the creative gambles that for so long was the hallmark of Bill Belichick defenses. Against Denver two weeks ago, with the Broncos' "Wild Horses" offense causing all sorts of problems, the Patriots did almost nothing but stay at home in their base defensive packages -- and Kyle Orton picked them apart.
On Sunday, though, the Patriots blitzed. They blitzed corners off the edge. They blitzed safeties up the middle. They blitzed linebackers from just about everywhere. They didn't blitz too much -- by the count of this reporter, they blitzed on 13 of their 36 defensive snaps in the first half -- but they blitzed enough to keep young quarterback Josh Johnson looking over his shoulder.
And while it didn't make much of a difference against the woeful Buccaneers, who would have lost big no matter what, it did demonstrate that it did demonstrate that the Patriots' new-look defense still is capable of executing the same complex defensive packages as its predecessors.
Here's a look at how the Patriots distributed their blitzes in the first half before the score started to get out of hand:
* Brandon McGowan blitzed four times;
* Jonathan Wilhite blitzed three times;
* Adalius Thomas -- remember him? -- blitzed three times;
* Wilhite and McGowan blitzed at the same time twice, including on the interception that Brandon Meriweather returned for a touchdown;
* Gary Guyton blitzed twice;
* Meriweather blitzed once, doing so in tandem with Thomas;
* Jerod Mayo blitzed once;
* Patrick Chung blitzed once;
* Leigh Bodden blitzed once.
And that's just the first half.
Oh, and the Patriots frequently lined up Tully Banta-Cain and Derrick Burgess at defensive end, flanking Vince Wilfork and Ty Warren, and both Banta-Cain and Burgess are at their best when they're going after the quarterback.
The result?
* Thomas had a quarterback hurry;
* Banta-Cain had two tackles for a loss;
* Chung had a sack and a quarterback hurry;
* Guyton had a tackle for a loss and a quarterback hurry;
* Mike Wright had a sack and a quarterback hurry;
* Myron Pryor had a quarterback hurry and a tackle for a loss;
* McGowan, Meriweather and bodden each broke up two passes.
The Patriots will face the Dolphins at Gillette Stadium in two weeks, a team that sparked the Wildcat revolution across the NFL. The Patriots weren't able to deal with the "Wild Horses" offense the Broncos threw at them, eschewing creativity in favor of conservatism.
It'll be interesting to see if they do the same against Miami.
Friday, October 23, 2009
Jed Hoyer and Adrian Gonzalez
With it all but official that Jed Hoyer will make the move to San Diego, the question immediately arises: Will the Padres' new general manager use his best trading chip to restock what Baseball America ranked as the second-worst collection of talent in the major leagues -- and will the farm system he used to supervise be the farm system he targets?
Yes, he will. It makes too much sense for him not to.
The Red Sox and Padres already were a natural fit for an Adrian Gonzalez trade this winter. Gonzalez is under contract through 2011 -- assuming his team exercises a bargain-basement $5.6 million option -- and ranked 10th in the major leagues in Wins Above Replacement, a Baseball Prospectus statistic that takes into consideration both hitting and fielding. Albert Pujols is the only first baseman in the game with a signficantly better WAR number than Gonzalez.
Bill Smith -- a New Hampshire native, by the way -- had to trade Johan Santana immediately upon taking over the job of general manager with the Minnesota Twins two years ago. Hoyer, in much the same way, will have to make trading Gonzalez his first order of business.
No, trading your best player doesn't seem like the best way for a struggling team to get back into contention -- and it certainly doesn't seem like the best way for a new general manager to ingratiate himself with his new fan base.
But the Padres aren't exactly close to competing. Jake Peavy has been traded away. Kevin Correia might be the team's Opening Day starting pitcher. Kevin Kouzmanoff's 18 home runs were second-best on the team behind Gonzalez. Chase Headley was the only other hitter with an OPS+ better than 100 -- in other words, he was the only other above-average hitter to get to the plate more than 350 times this season.
Funny thing: The team's top prospect, 23-year-old slugger Kyle Blanks, posted the following numbers on his climb up the ladder:
Single-A (adv.): .301 batting/.380 on-base/.540 slugging
Double-A: .325 batting/.404 on-base/.514 slugging
Triple-A: .283 batting/.393 on-base/.485 slugging
Oh, and he's a first baseman.
You'd better believe that if it wasn't part of the conversation during the farewell lunch, Hoyer left behind a note for Theo Epstein describing exactly the type of package it would take to pry Gonzalez away from him.
Epstein, tangentially, has a couple of choices this offseason:
1. He can stand pat and hope his team still is good enough to compete with the Rays and Yankees, essentially punting a season but conserving his resources until after he's out from under the contracts of Mike Lowell and David Ortiz.
2. He can reload and go for it again.
A move for Gonzalez, particularly if it didn't cost the Red Sox prized starting pitcher Clay Buchholz, would match last winter's Mark Teixeira signing by the Yankees and, particularly if Jason Bay was persuaded to re-sign, give the Red Sox a lineup every bit as ferocious as the lineup in the Bronx -- with OPS+ numbers from 2009:
1. Ellsbury, CF (L) -- 96
2. Pedroia, 2B (R) -- 108
3. Martinez, C (S) -- 121
4. Youkilis, 3B (R) -- 143
5. Ad. Gonzalez, 1B (L) -- 163
6. Bay, LF (R) -- 132
7. Drew, RF (L) -- 131
8. Ortiz/Lowell, DH (L/R) -- 100/104
9. Al. Gonzalez/Lowrie, SS (R/S) -- Who cares?
Gonzalez even is a full two years younger than Teixeira and thus would be a better bet for the type of lucrative long-term deal he'll command when he hits the open market after the 2011 season.
He'd immediately make the Red Sox lineup both younger and, well, better -- both at Fenway Park and on the road. He'd allow Epstein to check off pretty much the only item on his offseason to-do list other than maybe sign a veteran starting pitcher on the cheap to provide insurance for Tim Wakefield.
All it would cost would be the jewels of the Red Sox farm system.
Casey Kelly would have to be included. Ryan Westmoreland would have to be included. Josh Reddick would have to be included. Ryan Kalish would have to be included. Daniel Bard might even have to be included -- something you'd think the Red Sox would do if they don't see him as a starting pitcher in the future.
That's a deal both the Padres and the Red Sox would make.
1. The Red Sox would make that deal because their resources allow them to focus perpetually on the short term. Neither Kelly nor Westmoreland, easily the team's two top prospects, are going to be factors in the major leagues until 2012 even if they started next season at Double-A and spent just one season at each level of the minor-league ladder. Rather than waiting for Kelly, for example, the Red Sox could trade him away and throw truckloads of money at Felix Hernandez when he hits the free-agent market after the 2011 season at the ripe old age of 25.
(And because of the resources they devote to the draft, the Red Sox can focus on ready-for-prime-time talent next June, no matter how expensive, in an effort to restock the shelves in time for 2012 or 2013.)
2. The Padres would make that deal because they're not going to compete without restocking their farm system -- and they're far enough away that they don't need prospects who are almost ready for the major leagues.
Consider the Bartolo Colon trade from back in 2002. The Indians, whose run of dominance in the American League Central seemed to have come to an end, traded Colon to the Montreal Expos, a team in danger of imminent contraction and thus a team with a desperation to win right away, sent back a package that included journeyman major leaguer Lee Stevens and three prospects:
* 23-year-old pitcher Cliff Lee had spent most of the season at Double-A and had just made his major-league debut. He wouldn't make 30 starts in the major leagues for the first time until 2004 but would win a Cy Young Award in 2008.
* 21-year-old infielder Brandon Phillips had just been promoted to Triple-A and actually would spend the next three seasons in Triple-A before the Indians tired of him and shipped him off to Cincinnati -- where he hit 30 home runs in 2007.
* 19-year-old outfielder Grady Sizemore split his season between Single-A Brevard County and Single-A Kinston, and he didn't even make an appearance in Double-A until the following season. He made his first All-Star team in 2006 -- four years after the trade.
Bad teams, as we've again learned with the news that Steve Phillips once offered a 19-year-old David Wright to Toronto for Jose Cruz Jr., can improve themselves by swapping established players for teenagers. The Indians lost 94 games in 2003 but won 93 games in 2005 and came within one win of the World Series in 2007 -- and every single one of their fans would do the Colon trade all over again if given a chance.
Hoyer isn't going to go all out to win next season or even the season after that -- and, by then, Gonzalez likely will be gone. Hoyer has a massive rebuilding project on his hands, and it's not a rebuilding project in which Gonzalez can assist.
If Hoyer could trade for a pitcher in his early 20s with an electric arm (Bard) and an outfielder in his teens with breathtaking athleticism (Westmoreland) and add Kalish or Kelly or Reddick to the package, he'd be doing himself a favor.
And if the Red Sox could trade for a lefthanded power hitter who's still three years shy of his 30th birthday, they'd be setting themselves up for another run at the World Series both next season and the season after that.
A team with their resources doesn't need to think too much farther down the road than that.
Yes, he will. It makes too much sense for him not to.
The Red Sox and Padres already were a natural fit for an Adrian Gonzalez trade this winter. Gonzalez is under contract through 2011 -- assuming his team exercises a bargain-basement $5.6 million option -- and ranked 10th in the major leagues in Wins Above Replacement, a Baseball Prospectus statistic that takes into consideration both hitting and fielding. Albert Pujols is the only first baseman in the game with a signficantly better WAR number than Gonzalez.
Bill Smith -- a New Hampshire native, by the way -- had to trade Johan Santana immediately upon taking over the job of general manager with the Minnesota Twins two years ago. Hoyer, in much the same way, will have to make trading Gonzalez his first order of business.
No, trading your best player doesn't seem like the best way for a struggling team to get back into contention -- and it certainly doesn't seem like the best way for a new general manager to ingratiate himself with his new fan base.
But the Padres aren't exactly close to competing. Jake Peavy has been traded away. Kevin Correia might be the team's Opening Day starting pitcher. Kevin Kouzmanoff's 18 home runs were second-best on the team behind Gonzalez. Chase Headley was the only other hitter with an OPS+ better than 100 -- in other words, he was the only other above-average hitter to get to the plate more than 350 times this season.
Funny thing: The team's top prospect, 23-year-old slugger Kyle Blanks, posted the following numbers on his climb up the ladder:
Single-A (adv.): .301 batting/.380 on-base/.540 slugging
Double-A: .325 batting/.404 on-base/.514 slugging
Triple-A: .283 batting/.393 on-base/.485 slugging
Oh, and he's a first baseman.
You'd better believe that if it wasn't part of the conversation during the farewell lunch, Hoyer left behind a note for Theo Epstein describing exactly the type of package it would take to pry Gonzalez away from him.
Epstein, tangentially, has a couple of choices this offseason:
1. He can stand pat and hope his team still is good enough to compete with the Rays and Yankees, essentially punting a season but conserving his resources until after he's out from under the contracts of Mike Lowell and David Ortiz.
2. He can reload and go for it again.
A move for Gonzalez, particularly if it didn't cost the Red Sox prized starting pitcher Clay Buchholz, would match last winter's Mark Teixeira signing by the Yankees and, particularly if Jason Bay was persuaded to re-sign, give the Red Sox a lineup every bit as ferocious as the lineup in the Bronx -- with OPS+ numbers from 2009:
1. Ellsbury, CF (L) -- 96
2. Pedroia, 2B (R) -- 108
3. Martinez, C (S) -- 121
4. Youkilis, 3B (R) -- 143
5. Ad. Gonzalez, 1B (L) -- 163
6. Bay, LF (R) -- 132
7. Drew, RF (L) -- 131
8. Ortiz/Lowell, DH (L/R) -- 100/104
9. Al. Gonzalez/Lowrie, SS (R/S) -- Who cares?
Gonzalez even is a full two years younger than Teixeira and thus would be a better bet for the type of lucrative long-term deal he'll command when he hits the open market after the 2011 season.
He'd immediately make the Red Sox lineup both younger and, well, better -- both at Fenway Park and on the road. He'd allow Epstein to check off pretty much the only item on his offseason to-do list other than maybe sign a veteran starting pitcher on the cheap to provide insurance for Tim Wakefield.
All it would cost would be the jewels of the Red Sox farm system.
Casey Kelly would have to be included. Ryan Westmoreland would have to be included. Josh Reddick would have to be included. Ryan Kalish would have to be included. Daniel Bard might even have to be included -- something you'd think the Red Sox would do if they don't see him as a starting pitcher in the future.
That's a deal both the Padres and the Red Sox would make.
1. The Red Sox would make that deal because their resources allow them to focus perpetually on the short term. Neither Kelly nor Westmoreland, easily the team's two top prospects, are going to be factors in the major leagues until 2012 even if they started next season at Double-A and spent just one season at each level of the minor-league ladder. Rather than waiting for Kelly, for example, the Red Sox could trade him away and throw truckloads of money at Felix Hernandez when he hits the free-agent market after the 2011 season at the ripe old age of 25.
(And because of the resources they devote to the draft, the Red Sox can focus on ready-for-prime-time talent next June, no matter how expensive, in an effort to restock the shelves in time for 2012 or 2013.)
2. The Padres would make that deal because they're not going to compete without restocking their farm system -- and they're far enough away that they don't need prospects who are almost ready for the major leagues.
Consider the Bartolo Colon trade from back in 2002. The Indians, whose run of dominance in the American League Central seemed to have come to an end, traded Colon to the Montreal Expos, a team in danger of imminent contraction and thus a team with a desperation to win right away, sent back a package that included journeyman major leaguer Lee Stevens and three prospects:
* 23-year-old pitcher Cliff Lee had spent most of the season at Double-A and had just made his major-league debut. He wouldn't make 30 starts in the major leagues for the first time until 2004 but would win a Cy Young Award in 2008.
* 21-year-old infielder Brandon Phillips had just been promoted to Triple-A and actually would spend the next three seasons in Triple-A before the Indians tired of him and shipped him off to Cincinnati -- where he hit 30 home runs in 2007.
* 19-year-old outfielder Grady Sizemore split his season between Single-A Brevard County and Single-A Kinston, and he didn't even make an appearance in Double-A until the following season. He made his first All-Star team in 2006 -- four years after the trade.
Bad teams, as we've again learned with the news that Steve Phillips once offered a 19-year-old David Wright to Toronto for Jose Cruz Jr., can improve themselves by swapping established players for teenagers. The Indians lost 94 games in 2003 but won 93 games in 2005 and came within one win of the World Series in 2007 -- and every single one of their fans would do the Colon trade all over again if given a chance.
Hoyer isn't going to go all out to win next season or even the season after that -- and, by then, Gonzalez likely will be gone. Hoyer has a massive rebuilding project on his hands, and it's not a rebuilding project in which Gonzalez can assist.
If Hoyer could trade for a pitcher in his early 20s with an electric arm (Bard) and an outfielder in his teens with breathtaking athleticism (Westmoreland) and add Kalish or Kelly or Reddick to the package, he'd be doing himself a favor.
And if the Red Sox could trade for a lefthanded power hitter who's still three years shy of his 30th birthday, they'd be setting themselves up for another run at the World Series both next season and the season after that.
A team with their resources doesn't need to think too much farther down the road than that.
Red Sox MVP No. 1: Kevin Youkilis
(A five-part series about the players most integral to the success the Red Sox enjoyed this season. Previously appearing on the countdown: No. 5 Jonathan Papelbon, No. 4 Josh Beckett, No. 3 Jason Bay and No. 2 Jon Lester.)
The Red Sox tried to throw $180 million at Mark Teixeira last winter, going all-out to find a way to land the switch-hitting first baseman, widely considered the best first baseman in the American League, and get him into their lineup.
As it turns out, the best first baseman in the American League might already have been on their roster. Kevin Youkilis followed up his MVP-caliber campaign in 2008 with yet another sensational season in 2009 -- and his emergence as a star did soften the Teixeira blow a little bit. Check out this season's leaderboard in a few advanced statistical categories, first basemen only:
OPS
1. Youkilis, .961
2. Teixeira, .948
3. Miguel Cabrera, .942
4. Kendry Morales, .924
5. Carlos Pena, .893
OPS+
1. Teixeira, 146
t-2. Youkilis, 143
t-2. Cabrera, 143
t-4. Justin Morneau, 135
t-4. Morales, 135
Wins Above Replacement
t-1. Youkilis, 5.5
t-1. Cabrera, 5.5
3. Teixeira, 5.2
4. Morales, 4.3
5. Morneau, 3.2
Weighted On-Base Average (wOBA)
1. Youkilis, .413
t-2. Teixeira, .402
t-2. Cabrera, .402
4. Morales, .382
5. Pena, .374
Many analysts believe in wOBA -- a replacement for OPS that weighs on-base percentage more heavily than slugging percentage -- as the ultimate statistic to measure production of hitters. The only hitter in the American League to finish the season with a better wOBA than Youkilis was Joe Mauer, the all but certain Most Valuable Player.
If not for Mauer, in fact, Youkilis would have a pretty good argument to be considered the American League's MVP. His ability to move from first base to third base and back again only makes him a more impressive candidate: Without his flexibility, it seems unlikely the Red Sox could have done what they did with Mike Lowell and Victor Martinez down the stretch.
The Red Sox signed Youkilis to a four-year contract extension in January, locking him up through the 2012 season with a team option for 2013. He made $6 million this season and will make $9.125 million next season -- numbers that likewise afford the Red Sox tremendous flexibility. Check out the 2009-10 salary numbers for some of Youkilis' statistical peers:
Cabrera: $15 million/$20 million
Morales: $0.6 million/$0.7 million
Morneau: $10.6 million/$14 million
Pena: $8 million/$10.125 million
Teixeira: $20 million/$20 million
Other than Morales, a bargain of epic proportions, Youkilis is making less than any of the first basemen who put up similar production. He made less than a third of what Teixeira made last season, and he'll still make less than half of what Teixeira makes next season. For a team that still needs to find a thumper in the middle of the lineup for next season, that financial flexibility might be critical.
Either way, though, it's pretty clear Youkilis is right there with the best hitters in the American League -- and his defensive flexibility makes him far and away the most valuable player on the Red Sox roster.
The Red Sox tried to throw $180 million at Mark Teixeira last winter, going all-out to find a way to land the switch-hitting first baseman, widely considered the best first baseman in the American League, and get him into their lineup.
As it turns out, the best first baseman in the American League might already have been on their roster. Kevin Youkilis followed up his MVP-caliber campaign in 2008 with yet another sensational season in 2009 -- and his emergence as a star did soften the Teixeira blow a little bit. Check out this season's leaderboard in a few advanced statistical categories, first basemen only:
OPS
1. Youkilis, .961
2. Teixeira, .948
3. Miguel Cabrera, .942
4. Kendry Morales, .924
5. Carlos Pena, .893
OPS+
1. Teixeira, 146
t-2. Youkilis, 143
t-2. Cabrera, 143
t-4. Justin Morneau, 135
t-4. Morales, 135
Wins Above Replacement
t-1. Youkilis, 5.5
t-1. Cabrera, 5.5
3. Teixeira, 5.2
4. Morales, 4.3
5. Morneau, 3.2
Weighted On-Base Average (wOBA)
1. Youkilis, .413
t-2. Teixeira, .402
t-2. Cabrera, .402
4. Morales, .382
5. Pena, .374
Many analysts believe in wOBA -- a replacement for OPS that weighs on-base percentage more heavily than slugging percentage -- as the ultimate statistic to measure production of hitters. The only hitter in the American League to finish the season with a better wOBA than Youkilis was Joe Mauer, the all but certain Most Valuable Player.
If not for Mauer, in fact, Youkilis would have a pretty good argument to be considered the American League's MVP. His ability to move from first base to third base and back again only makes him a more impressive candidate: Without his flexibility, it seems unlikely the Red Sox could have done what they did with Mike Lowell and Victor Martinez down the stretch.
The Red Sox signed Youkilis to a four-year contract extension in January, locking him up through the 2012 season with a team option for 2013. He made $6 million this season and will make $9.125 million next season -- numbers that likewise afford the Red Sox tremendous flexibility. Check out the 2009-10 salary numbers for some of Youkilis' statistical peers:
Cabrera: $15 million/$20 million
Morales: $0.6 million/$0.7 million
Morneau: $10.6 million/$14 million
Pena: $8 million/$10.125 million
Teixeira: $20 million/$20 million
Other than Morales, a bargain of epic proportions, Youkilis is making less than any of the first basemen who put up similar production. He made less than a third of what Teixeira made last season, and he'll still make less than half of what Teixeira makes next season. For a team that still needs to find a thumper in the middle of the lineup for next season, that financial flexibility might be critical.
Either way, though, it's pretty clear Youkilis is right there with the best hitters in the American League -- and his defensive flexibility makes him far and away the most valuable player on the Red Sox roster.
Thursday, October 22, 2009
Figuring out why Adalius didn't fit
For a big-play linebacker, Adalius Thomas doesn't have many big plays this season. He has just one sack and one pass break-up through five games, a far cry from the 11 sacks he had in his final season with the Ravens or the 11.5 combined sacks he had in his first two seasons with the Patriots.
Thomas' deactivation against the Titans on Sunday stunned most fans and analysts -- and it stunned him, too. The two-time Pro Bowler had been seen as a cornerstone of the Patriots' defense and not the type of player who ever would be deactivated for a reason not related to an injury.
But the Patriots had to employ a certain type of game plan against the Titans, and Thomas didn't quite fit into it. That game plan? Prevent running back Chris Johnson from getting to the edge.
Thomas has been playing out of position for much of the season. The retirement of Tedy Bruschi and the injury to Jerod Mayo created a void at middle linebacker, and as one of the best linebackers left on the roster, Thomas moved inside and played quite a few September snaps alongside Gary Guyton in the middle.
That, though, didn't seem to work for him. He didn't spend much time rushing the passer, instead frequently lining up across from tight ends or defending against the run in the middle of the field. He seemed to do OK in pass coverage but struggled at times against the run in Denver, missing some key tackles in a game the Patriots eventually lost.
He spent almost an entire possession on the sideline, watching as journeyman Rob Ninkovich had a sack and a hurry on the Broncos' longest drive of the first half. Even when he was in there, though, he missed an open-field tackle on wide receiver Brandon Marshall and found himself blocked out of the play by just about any body the Broncos put in front of him.
That wasn't going to work against Tennessee.
The Chris Johnson-led Titans have been a running team all season. They've actually averaged as many yards per rush (5.3) as they have per pass attempt, something that's not easy to do in a quarterbacks' league. Entering play Sunday, they ranked eighth in the NFL in rushing yards per game (127.6) but 21st in passing yards per game (208.2). Kerry Collins might get most of the publicity, but it's Johnson's speed around the edge that defenses worry about most.
That seems to be why, even though the Patriots returned to the 3-4 base defense for which they're best known, Thomas didn't quite fit. Derrick Burgess played almost every defensive snap in the first half with Tully Banta-Cain, Pierre Woods and Rob Ninkovich rotating in opposite him -- and all four seemed to focus almost exclusively on run contain.
The Patriots sent five defenders across the line of scrimmage on just about every snap, but the two outside linebackers didn't usually go after Collins. They usually got upfield as quickly as they could to take away the outside running game from Johnson:
That's not Thomas' game. Against Denver, in fact, Thomas had quite a bit of trouble trying to corral opposing running backs no matter where he lined up.
Be it because of his lack of production or a message-necessitating lack of effort, the Patriots made the decision that sitting Thomas against a run-heavy team gave them a better chance to win.
The Tampa Bay Buccaneers, for what it's worth, are equally woeful running the ball and passing the ball. Quarterback Josh Johnson has a tendency to scramble out of the pocket, and he's been sacked 10 times in his three starts this season.
If the Patriots believe they can give Johnson trouble by getting in his face, well, you'll probably see Thomas active and on the outside of a 3-4 defense just like you did last season and the season before that.
Thomas' deactivation against the Titans on Sunday stunned most fans and analysts -- and it stunned him, too. The two-time Pro Bowler had been seen as a cornerstone of the Patriots' defense and not the type of player who ever would be deactivated for a reason not related to an injury.
But the Patriots had to employ a certain type of game plan against the Titans, and Thomas didn't quite fit into it. That game plan? Prevent running back Chris Johnson from getting to the edge.
Thomas has been playing out of position for much of the season. The retirement of Tedy Bruschi and the injury to Jerod Mayo created a void at middle linebacker, and as one of the best linebackers left on the roster, Thomas moved inside and played quite a few September snaps alongside Gary Guyton in the middle.
That, though, didn't seem to work for him. He didn't spend much time rushing the passer, instead frequently lining up across from tight ends or defending against the run in the middle of the field. He seemed to do OK in pass coverage but struggled at times against the run in Denver, missing some key tackles in a game the Patriots eventually lost.
He spent almost an entire possession on the sideline, watching as journeyman Rob Ninkovich had a sack and a hurry on the Broncos' longest drive of the first half. Even when he was in there, though, he missed an open-field tackle on wide receiver Brandon Marshall and found himself blocked out of the play by just about any body the Broncos put in front of him.
That wasn't going to work against Tennessee.
The Chris Johnson-led Titans have been a running team all season. They've actually averaged as many yards per rush (5.3) as they have per pass attempt, something that's not easy to do in a quarterbacks' league. Entering play Sunday, they ranked eighth in the NFL in rushing yards per game (127.6) but 21st in passing yards per game (208.2). Kerry Collins might get most of the publicity, but it's Johnson's speed around the edge that defenses worry about most.
That seems to be why, even though the Patriots returned to the 3-4 base defense for which they're best known, Thomas didn't quite fit. Derrick Burgess played almost every defensive snap in the first half with Tully Banta-Cain, Pierre Woods and Rob Ninkovich rotating in opposite him -- and all four seemed to focus almost exclusively on run contain.
The Patriots sent five defenders across the line of scrimmage on just about every snap, but the two outside linebackers didn't usually go after Collins. They usually got upfield as quickly as they could to take away the outside running game from Johnson:
That's not Thomas' game. Against Denver, in fact, Thomas had quite a bit of trouble trying to corral opposing running backs no matter where he lined up.
Be it because of his lack of production or a message-necessitating lack of effort, the Patriots made the decision that sitting Thomas against a run-heavy team gave them a better chance to win.
The Tampa Bay Buccaneers, for what it's worth, are equally woeful running the ball and passing the ball. Quarterback Josh Johnson has a tendency to scramble out of the pocket, and he's been sacked 10 times in his three starts this season.
If the Patriots believe they can give Johnson trouble by getting in his face, well, you'll probably see Thomas active and on the outside of a 3-4 defense just like you did last season and the season before that.
Red Sox MVP No. 2: Jon Lester
(A five-part series about the players most integral to the success the Red Sox enjoyed this season. Previously appearing on the countdown: Closer Jonathan Papelbon at No. 5, starting pitcher Josh Beckett at No. 4 and left fielder Jason Bay at No. 3.)
Jon Lester isn't going to win the Cy Young Award this season. Zack Greinke had a season of historic proportions, and Felix Hernandez was almost as good. Behind those two, Roy Halladay seemed to fade in the second half but still once again put up numbers worthy of Cy Young consideration for the fourth straight season.
The Adjusted ERA+ numbers bear that out:
1. Greinke, 203
2. Hernandez, 174
3. Halladay, 157
After that, though?
4. Lester, 139
Lester finished this season unquestionably among the elite pitchers in the major leagues. He might just be the best lefty in the game right now. His strikeout rate (9.96 per nine innings pitched) was second-best in the American League behind only Detroit's Justin Verlander. When Terry Francona chose Lester to start Game 1 of the American League Division Series instead of playoff hero Josh Beckett, it was met with shrugs everywhere because it was so easy a choice.
At risk of being a wet blanket, though, the sensational season Lester turned in doesn't ensure he'll keep dominating in the years to come. Before this season, eight lefties since Lester was born have finished a season with at least 9.0 strikeouts per nine innings -- and they haven't all turned into Randy Johnson:
1. Rick Ankiel, 2000 (194 K in 174 IP)
Everyone knows the story by now. Ankiel tore through the National League, posting an ERA+ of 134 in his rookie season with the Cardinals -- but when he got the the postseason, he suddenly no longer could pitch. He walked 11 hitters and threw nine wild pitches in his three appearances and never pitched effectively in the major leagues again.
2. Erik Bedard, 2007 (221 K in 182 IP)
In easily his best pro season, Bedard catapulted himself into the conversation about the major leagues' elite arms with a 3.16 ERA in his final season before his arbitration award was set to skyrocket. He was traded to Seattle in a deal that netted the Orioles top prospects Adam Jones, George Sherrill and Chris Tillman, shipped to a big ballpark in which he should have thrived. Instead, an issue with his shoulder landed him on the disabled list -- and he's made a total of 30 starts in the two seasons since.
That's not exactly what the Red Sox are hoping to get out of Lester.
3. Sid Fernandez, 1985 (180 K in 170 1/3 IP)
After a decent if unspectacular debut with the Mets in 1984, Fernandez finished fifth in the National League in strikeouts and led the National League in hits allowed per nine innings in 1985. He didn't let up from there, either: From 1985-89, he averaged 8.7 strikeouts per nine innings and accumulated a 3.18 ERA -- eighth-best in the major leagues during that span.
That's not a bad expectation for Lester, but his ceiling might be higher than that.
4. Johnson, 1991 (228 K in 152 IP)
One of the greatest lefties in the history of the game, the hard-throwing Johnson didn't put it together until he started to cut down his walks. He walked 152 hitters in that 1991 season -- no one has walked that many in a season since -- and 144 in the Mariners' awful 1992 season before morphing into the pitcher who will walk into the Hall of Fame in six or seven years. (He'll have to duck his head, of course, when he walks in.)
His strikeout totals jumped at the same time: He fanned 10.9 hitters per nine innings in 1993 and 12.3 per nine innings in 1995, the season he won his first Cy Young Award. After that, he didn't strike out fewer than 12.0 per nine innings again until 2002 -- the year he won his fifth Cy Young Award.
Johnson is in his own category. There's no comparison possible.
5. Scott Kazmir, 2007 (239 K in 206 2/3 IP)
The 23-year-old Kazmir made the Mets look silly as a 23-year-old, leading the American League in strikeouts and winning 13 games for the hapless Tampa Bay Devil Rays in their final year both of being hapless and of being the Devil Rays. He was poised to enter the season as the ace of the Rays' staff but strained his elbow in spring training and missed the first month. A year later, he missed another month with a quadriceps injury -- and he had a 5.92 ERA in 20 starts when the Rays traded him to the Angels.
That's not quite what the Red Sox have in mind with Lester.
6. Mark Langston, 1986 (245 K in 239 1/3 IP)
Much like Johnson, Langston broke into the league as a strikeout pitcher but didn't put it all together until he cut down on his walks. He walked more than 4.5 hitters per nine innings in each of his first three seasons but turned into a Cy Young candidate in 1987, the first year he had fewer than 4.5 walks per nine innings. His ERA then dropped in each of the next three seasons, tumbling all the way down to 2.74 in the 1989 season that prompted the Montreal Expos to deal -- who else? -- Johnson for him. Langston then signed with the Angels as a free agent and had a 3.90 ERA over the next seven seasons.
If Lester had a similar career to the one enjoyed by Langston -- he even went 15-7 with 142 strikeouts in 1995 -- it would be tough to be disappointed.
7. Oliver Perez, 2004 (239 K in 196 IP)
Here's the big cautionary tale. The Randy Johnson comparisons began to surface after a 2004 season in which the 22-year-old fanned a National League-high 11.0 batters per nine innings. A year later, though, he fought with shoulder stiffness in the spring and never recaptured the same type of magic. He then kicked a metal laundry cart in June and broke his toe, missing two months.
The goofy thing about Perez, though, is this: The Pirates treated him with kid gloves, even going so far as to forbid him from pitching in the winter leagues in his native Mexico after he threw 196 innings in that 2004 season. The team then claimed that Perez did not follow its prescribed offseason conditioning program and therefore saw both his endurance and his mechanics evaporate. A year later, they permitted him to go pitch for his hometown team in the winter -- and, a year later, his bad ERA (5.85) got even worse (6.55).
Lester saw a huge spike in his innings pitched a year ago, and many wondered if he might not last the season if he had to endure a similar workload. He and the Red Sox, though, seem to have figured out a way to keep his mechanics in order and his arm healthy. That's where the similarities between him and Perez seem to end.
8. Johan Santana, 2004 (265 K in 228 IP)
Billy Wagner didn't mince words when talking about Lester a couple of weeks ago.
"There's not really a better lefty than him," Wagner told ESPNBoston.com. "Johan is not as overall talented as him -- not to take anything away from Johan."
Santana and Lester have quite a few similarities, in fact: Not only are the two are close to the same height and weight, but Santana was 25 years old in his breakthrough season in 2004 -- the same age Lester was this past season. Santana had come up as a relief pitcher but became a workhorse starting pitcher for the first time in 2004. He had a sub-3.00 ERA in four of his next five seasons and has a 2.86 ERA since becoming a starting pitcher full-time; even with the elbow injury that cost him the final month of his season, he remains the standard by which all lefties are measured.
That elbow injury, though, is another warning sign: Both the Red Sox and Yankees had questions about the long-term health of Santana when they discussed acquiring him from from the Minnesota Twins two years ago. Santana had thrown more than 230 innings, including the postseason, in four of his last five seasons, and the strain might finally have caught up with him. That's exactly what the Red Sox are trying to avoid with Lester.
Then again, if the Red Sox can give five more years of best-pitcher-in-baseball performances from Lester, maybe anything else is gravy.
Jon Lester isn't going to win the Cy Young Award this season. Zack Greinke had a season of historic proportions, and Felix Hernandez was almost as good. Behind those two, Roy Halladay seemed to fade in the second half but still once again put up numbers worthy of Cy Young consideration for the fourth straight season.
The Adjusted ERA+ numbers bear that out:
1. Greinke, 203
2. Hernandez, 174
3. Halladay, 157
After that, though?
4. Lester, 139
Lester finished this season unquestionably among the elite pitchers in the major leagues. He might just be the best lefty in the game right now. His strikeout rate (9.96 per nine innings pitched) was second-best in the American League behind only Detroit's Justin Verlander. When Terry Francona chose Lester to start Game 1 of the American League Division Series instead of playoff hero Josh Beckett, it was met with shrugs everywhere because it was so easy a choice.
At risk of being a wet blanket, though, the sensational season Lester turned in doesn't ensure he'll keep dominating in the years to come. Before this season, eight lefties since Lester was born have finished a season with at least 9.0 strikeouts per nine innings -- and they haven't all turned into Randy Johnson:
1. Rick Ankiel, 2000 (194 K in 174 IP)
Everyone knows the story by now. Ankiel tore through the National League, posting an ERA+ of 134 in his rookie season with the Cardinals -- but when he got the the postseason, he suddenly no longer could pitch. He walked 11 hitters and threw nine wild pitches in his three appearances and never pitched effectively in the major leagues again.
2. Erik Bedard, 2007 (221 K in 182 IP)
In easily his best pro season, Bedard catapulted himself into the conversation about the major leagues' elite arms with a 3.16 ERA in his final season before his arbitration award was set to skyrocket. He was traded to Seattle in a deal that netted the Orioles top prospects Adam Jones, George Sherrill and Chris Tillman, shipped to a big ballpark in which he should have thrived. Instead, an issue with his shoulder landed him on the disabled list -- and he's made a total of 30 starts in the two seasons since.
That's not exactly what the Red Sox are hoping to get out of Lester.
3. Sid Fernandez, 1985 (180 K in 170 1/3 IP)
After a decent if unspectacular debut with the Mets in 1984, Fernandez finished fifth in the National League in strikeouts and led the National League in hits allowed per nine innings in 1985. He didn't let up from there, either: From 1985-89, he averaged 8.7 strikeouts per nine innings and accumulated a 3.18 ERA -- eighth-best in the major leagues during that span.
That's not a bad expectation for Lester, but his ceiling might be higher than that.
4. Johnson, 1991 (228 K in 152 IP)
One of the greatest lefties in the history of the game, the hard-throwing Johnson didn't put it together until he started to cut down his walks. He walked 152 hitters in that 1991 season -- no one has walked that many in a season since -- and 144 in the Mariners' awful 1992 season before morphing into the pitcher who will walk into the Hall of Fame in six or seven years. (He'll have to duck his head, of course, when he walks in.)
His strikeout totals jumped at the same time: He fanned 10.9 hitters per nine innings in 1993 and 12.3 per nine innings in 1995, the season he won his first Cy Young Award. After that, he didn't strike out fewer than 12.0 per nine innings again until 2002 -- the year he won his fifth Cy Young Award.
Johnson is in his own category. There's no comparison possible.
5. Scott Kazmir, 2007 (239 K in 206 2/3 IP)
The 23-year-old Kazmir made the Mets look silly as a 23-year-old, leading the American League in strikeouts and winning 13 games for the hapless Tampa Bay Devil Rays in their final year both of being hapless and of being the Devil Rays. He was poised to enter the season as the ace of the Rays' staff but strained his elbow in spring training and missed the first month. A year later, he missed another month with a quadriceps injury -- and he had a 5.92 ERA in 20 starts when the Rays traded him to the Angels.
That's not quite what the Red Sox have in mind with Lester.
6. Mark Langston, 1986 (245 K in 239 1/3 IP)
Much like Johnson, Langston broke into the league as a strikeout pitcher but didn't put it all together until he cut down on his walks. He walked more than 4.5 hitters per nine innings in each of his first three seasons but turned into a Cy Young candidate in 1987, the first year he had fewer than 4.5 walks per nine innings. His ERA then dropped in each of the next three seasons, tumbling all the way down to 2.74 in the 1989 season that prompted the Montreal Expos to deal -- who else? -- Johnson for him. Langston then signed with the Angels as a free agent and had a 3.90 ERA over the next seven seasons.
If Lester had a similar career to the one enjoyed by Langston -- he even went 15-7 with 142 strikeouts in 1995 -- it would be tough to be disappointed.
7. Oliver Perez, 2004 (239 K in 196 IP)
Here's the big cautionary tale. The Randy Johnson comparisons began to surface after a 2004 season in which the 22-year-old fanned a National League-high 11.0 batters per nine innings. A year later, though, he fought with shoulder stiffness in the spring and never recaptured the same type of magic. He then kicked a metal laundry cart in June and broke his toe, missing two months.
The goofy thing about Perez, though, is this: The Pirates treated him with kid gloves, even going so far as to forbid him from pitching in the winter leagues in his native Mexico after he threw 196 innings in that 2004 season. The team then claimed that Perez did not follow its prescribed offseason conditioning program and therefore saw both his endurance and his mechanics evaporate. A year later, they permitted him to go pitch for his hometown team in the winter -- and, a year later, his bad ERA (5.85) got even worse (6.55).
Lester saw a huge spike in his innings pitched a year ago, and many wondered if he might not last the season if he had to endure a similar workload. He and the Red Sox, though, seem to have figured out a way to keep his mechanics in order and his arm healthy. That's where the similarities between him and Perez seem to end.
8. Johan Santana, 2004 (265 K in 228 IP)
Billy Wagner didn't mince words when talking about Lester a couple of weeks ago.
"There's not really a better lefty than him," Wagner told ESPNBoston.com. "Johan is not as overall talented as him -- not to take anything away from Johan."
Santana and Lester have quite a few similarities, in fact: Not only are the two are close to the same height and weight, but Santana was 25 years old in his breakthrough season in 2004 -- the same age Lester was this past season. Santana had come up as a relief pitcher but became a workhorse starting pitcher for the first time in 2004. He had a sub-3.00 ERA in four of his next five seasons and has a 2.86 ERA since becoming a starting pitcher full-time; even with the elbow injury that cost him the final month of his season, he remains the standard by which all lefties are measured.
That elbow injury, though, is another warning sign: Both the Red Sox and Yankees had questions about the long-term health of Santana when they discussed acquiring him from from the Minnesota Twins two years ago. Santana had thrown more than 230 innings, including the postseason, in four of his last five seasons, and the strain might finally have caught up with him. That's exactly what the Red Sox are trying to avoid with Lester.
Then again, if the Red Sox can give five more years of best-pitcher-in-baseball performances from Lester, maybe anything else is gravy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
