Monthly Archives: December 2009

December 29, 2009

Mets add Bay, close on Molina

By Richard Gross

According to ESPN, the Mets added Jason Bay today for four years and $66 million plus a vesting option, and it’s just the kind of deal that Omar Minaya needed to make to save Omar Minaya’s butt. Sure, Bay’s defense was fourth-worst in baseball over the last three years, and he has the kind of skills that decline quickly, but he will help in the short term, and Minaya really only cares about next year, because his butt is on the line. Much of this we already said a couple weeks ago when the rumors started.

He’s been worth around $14 million a year during the last two years, which have been some of the best of his career. It takes the rosiest of glasses to see a 31-year-old actually improving to be worth the average annual value that the Mets will pay Bay. But suppose that his defense doesn’t look as bad in a more traditional ballpark – Citi Field’s left field is bigger, but it doesn’t feature the same arc-altering Green Monster that lurked behind Bay in Fenway – and you could see his defense being less of a minus and his offense playing so well that he’s worth the contract at least for a couple years.

So then it’s a good deal for Omar Minaya to sign, because he has to win now or go home. Now there are the new rumors that Bengie Molina is close to signing for two years and $12 millon, (coming from ESPNRadio’s Rich Coutinho through MetsBlog) which deserves a post of its own.  It seems that Minaya created quite a lineup, at least for the weaker league:

SS Jose Reyes
3B David Wright
CF Carlos Beltran
LF Jason Bay
1B Daniel Murphy
RF Jeff Francouer
C Bengie Molina
2B Luis Castillo

Of course, Jerry Manuel will tinker with it to make it worse, but you get the picture.

The team is still missing a number two pitcher, and has spent its purported $22 million in free agent money. We still like a high-upside signing like Erik Bedard and will get to the like shortly to do a little investigation.

It’s a strange day today. Mets fans should be happy that the team got another legitimate hitter, but should also be well aware by now that it’s put up or shut up time. If they don’t win in the next two years, the Mets will be faced with long-term decisions regarding Jose Reyes and David Wright, they’ll have little to nothing in the cupboard in terms of prospects, Johan Santana will be getting older, and Beltran will be out the door. (And Bay will probably be considered a Sunk Cost.)

So why not sign a high-upside, high-risk pitcher? We thought the Mets had $30 million to spend this offseason, they showed that they actually made money with Madoff, and they have a bunch of contracts that lineup in the next two years, a pitching need that isn’t solved by Bay, and a GM that is halfway out the door. Come on down, Ben Sheets!

Leave a comment   |  tags: , , , , , | posted in Uncategorized

December 26, 2009

Investigating Randy Winn

By Richard Gross

Today, Buster Olney suggested that since Peter Gammons thinks that Jason Bay would rather play in Beirut than Queens, the Mets should spend their free agent budget on depth to fit in around the returning injured stars (Insider article).

First, lets put away the idea that Jason Bay would not accept the Mets’ money. Sure, it may not be his preferred destination, but with the Red Sox talking about having about $5 million more to spend (total), and the Yankees also coming up against their (self-determined) cap, there’s really only the Braves and Giants that are even remotely close to providing an opportunity for Bay to get the money he wants. And both teams are acting like the mid-market teams that they are – the Braves traded Javier Vazquez to free up money for Troy Glaus and a stop-gap corner outfielder (not Bay), and the Giants are looking to add yet another post-peak declining veteran in Mark DeRosa (2 years and $12 million is the rumor). I believe Jason Bay will be wearing blue and orange next year if the Red Sox don’t free up money to sign him to their old 4 year / $60 million offer.

In the meantime, the Mets will have to sit on their offer and wait for Bay’s representatives to make a decision. That will take them out of the running for many of the other free agents – most prominently, Joel Piniero. Then again, that might be a good thing.

One of the names that Olney suggests is Randy Winn, who could possibly combine with Angel Pagan to provide a decent left fielder for a budget. That combo should certainly be good at defense, a fact that is not to be poo=pooed in spacious Citi Field.

The 35-year-old is post-peak and declining, but he’s always had the sort of athleticism that might allow him to age gracefully as he moves away from center field. Since 2005, he’s been a double-digit negative defender at center field, so he’s no longer a viable option there (no matter, Pagan and his scratch center field defense can back up Carlos Beltran in center). Winn will be a plus defender in the corners, where he’s been worth more than 10 runs per season (+17.4 UZR/150 last season). Along with Beltran, they’d have two-thirds of the outfield sowed up.

We’ve talked about the Mets’ struggles against left-handers, and unfortunately, Winn is coming off a bad season against southpaws, to say the least (.384 OPS in 2009). The good news, though, is that a good sample size for splits is close to 2000 at-bats, and when you zoom out on Winn’s career, he’s been fine against lefties (.758 OPS vs lefties, .764 OPS vs righties.) That should match up well with Pagan’s career splits (.714 OPS vs lefties, .805 OPS vs righties). Together, you’re talking about an outfielder that should out-do the .729 OPS Mets’ left-fielders put up last year, while bringing plus defense the table.

Randy Winn is not a bad idea at all. Signing him and John Lackey may have been the prescription here, but a combo of Winn, Piniero and Ben Sheets may be the best way for the Mets to spend their $22-25 million. We’ll investigate Sheets shortly.

1 comment   |  tags: , , , , , , , , , | posted in Uncategorized

December 20, 2009

Investigating Mark DeRosa

By Richard Gross

Today in a notebook, Nick Cafardo of the Boston Globe revealed that he’s heard that Mark DeRosa‘s contract demands have dropped to three years and $10 million. Suddenly, the super-utility player becomes interesting – he certainly wasn’t worth the three years and $27 million that he began the offseason requesting.

Last season, DeRosa combined passable defense at third base (-8.6 UZR/150) and passable offense (.250/.319/.433) to be worth about seven million dollars. Picking him up at $3 million per year seems like a no-brainer, especially since he could be a good platoon partner for Daniel Murphy. He’s been consistently better against lefties (.299/.368/.490) and can easily play first base and left field. He shows a little pop (.149 career ISO) that has developed recently (.196 and .183 ISOs the last two years). DeRosa has always walked well (8.6%) and doesn’t strike out much (19.1% career).

DeRosa had some rotten luck last year and could bounce back a little from his poor offensive line last year.  His BABIP (.286) was below his career number (.315) as well as his expected BABIP given his levels of line drives, ground balls, and stolen bases (.317). Add back in some dinks and dunks, and he should easily return to his customary .275/.343/.424 line. The Mets could use some offense like that, especially since it could come from multiple spots on the field and would help the Mets’ anemic offense versus lefties.

Then again, there are a lot of negatives to signing DeRosa. The most obvious is that he’s another veteran coming off an injury-plagued season. He could join the MASH unit and spend more time in the trainer’s office than on the field. We saw David Ortiz struggle all year with the same injury (tendon sheath) and he started with more power than DeRosa has ever shown. On the other hand, Ortiz suffered his injury in the middle of the season (June 3) and by the end of the season he showed some better power months (.516 SLG% after the all-star break). DeRosa will have the surgery this off-season and have time to recover. Though it’s concerning to teams and has helped depressed his value, DeRosa’s value is not so tied up in his slugging rate that this injury should keep him from being signed.

What could give prospective teams more pause is the fact that the 34-year-old is already declining. Also, since he debuted later and didn’t develop his power until he was 31, he could easily decline quickly. Research has shown that the performance bell curve tails off quicker for players that debut later. He could be precisely the kind of player that is valuable only during his peak, and overvalued thereafter.

Consider that between 2002 and 2005, when DeRosa was 27 through 30, his stats were worth a combined $100,000 on the market. That was when most players are peaking.

Looking at his recent full seasons, it seems that DeRosa will most likely approximate his 2007 stats, when he hit .293/.371/.420, and was worth approximately 5.8 runs with the bat. Combine that with some okay defense at first base and the outfield, he should easily approach a win of value (10 runs), which is worth more than $4 million on the open market. Paying him $3 million should produce a value, even if he is a super-sub that plays mostly against lefties and spells the future left fielder at times.

Just think, he’d only cost almost half as much as Luis Castillo.

4 comments | posted in Uncategorized

December 11, 2009

Investigating: Jason Bay

By Richard Gross

With the news, reported by Jon Heyman on twitter, that Mets offered Jason Bay four years and $65 million on the last day of the Winter Meetings, its seems only right for us at GBB to investigate the corner outfielder and determine whether or not the offer was an astute one. It certainly didn’t blow the Red Sox’ purported offer of four years and $60 million out of the water, so perhaps Bay is approaching his best offer. Heyman felt it would take five years to pry Bay loose, though.

On offense, there’s not that much to complain about with Bay. If you forget his poor showing at the 2005 Home Run Derby and his overall poor 2007, he’s great at the plate. His average full season in the majors has produced 30.2 home runs, 99.3 RBI, and an average around .280. The Mets could obviously use that in left field, considering that they received 13 homers and 84 RBI from that position last year. So far, so good.

What about 2007? That year he hit .247 with 21 homers and 84 RBI. Those numbers would certainly not be worth an average annual value of $16.25 million. One this is for sure, he was not lucky that year. He had a BABIP of .298, which sounds fine until you put it up next to his career BABIP of .332 and his xBABIP of .312 given his groundball, flyball and line drive statistics that year. He certainly wasn’t very unlucky, but he didn’t enjoy his normal luck in other words.

But was there more going on that year? That was the only full year that he walked less than 10% of the time (9.9% in 2009, 12.9% career) and also the only year in a five-year stretch from 2005 to 2009 that he didn’t crack double digits in stolen bases (four that year). He also missed some time that year with a knee injury and put up his worst at-bat totals in that same five year span. So 2007 looks like an aberration.

Are there signs of decline? It doesn’t seem like it on the offensive side. Bay put up his career high ISO last year (.269), hit more fly balls than ever before (49.1% in 2009, 44.4% career), and more of those flyballs left the park than in any other season save one (19.7% HR/FB in 2009, 17.0% career). His line drive percentage, which hasn’t been great in the last four years, also has been creeping towards respectability (17.7% in 2009, 18.3% career). He has a slight weakness against the curveball and the splitfinger, but he can hit every other pitch with impunity.

In order to find warning signs, you have to be looking for them. Yes, his strikeout rate was a career high (30.5% in 2009, 27% career), but he made up for it with good power and it wasn’t part of a pattern. It just seems to happen with him every couple of years. His contact rates also dipped a little last year, which is of course related, but they had held steady for most of his career before last year. No, he looks good on offense.

The problem is his defense. It usually takes about three years for UZR stats to become significant (there are just fewer opportunities on the defensive end than the offensive one), so when a player puts up three straight years of negative defensive UZR ratings, it’s time to sit up and take notice. Over the last three years, Bay’s average UZR/150 is -13.6, which means he gives up almost a win and a half on defense every year (10 runs equates a win, roughly).

In fact, Bay has been one of the worst defenders in baseball over the last three years. FanGraphs did a survey and he came out as the fifth-worst defender in baseball in that span, and, fittingly ended the article with a warning towards National League teams wanting to sign him. It’s surprising to see a batter with some speed (66 career stolen bases) be so poor on defense, but his 5.0 four-component speed score is right on the average, so he’s more of a smart base runner than a base-stealer with speed. Another thing that should worry Mets fans is that Citi Field’s left field is cavernous compared to Fenway. What will Bay do with all that extra space to patrol? Citi Field is anywhere from 100 to 150 feet bigger in most spots in left field.

And then shudder to think about 2013 and Bay limping around out there like Gary Sheffield.

You’d have to say that the defense means that the Mets will be overpaying for Jason Bay if they sign him at these current dollar amounts, and certainly if they pay him more. It’s not a lock that Bay would have been worth the same $29 million if he’d played the last two years in Citi Field, and it’s even less of a lock that he will continue to be worth that much into his mid-30s.

1 comment   |  tags: | posted in Uncategorized

December 5, 2009

Investigating Jason Marquis

By Richard Gross

MarquisAfter the ‘good’ news that the Mets have signed every backup catcher on the market, the Mets attention turns to trading Luis Castillo and finding that mid-rotation starter we’ve been talking about. After we investigated Joel Piniero and found that he had decent value as a ground ball inducing machine. But what about some other guys on the market that have similar profiles?

In particular, what about Jason Marquis? He had a career year, with his best FIP (fielding-independent pitching number), best win total, and five-year best in ERA. How did he do it?

Well, he did it with groundballs and a cutter, just like Piniero. His career high in ground ball percentage (55.6%) was organically better than his career rate (49.8%) so it doesn’t seem like he just had a lucky year. His ‘luck’ stats also don’t suggest that he was lucky – he had a reasonable BABIP (.291) and strand rate (70.5%). None of these stats will necessarily regress next year, so why do I still feel skeptical about the Rockies’ free agent starter?

Perhaps it’s irrational. Marquis made the groundball gains by using the same pitch as Piniero. Piniero, as we showed last week, cut down on his fastball (46.2% career, 36.8% in 2009) and favored the cutter (14.2% career, 27.6% in 2009) in order to get some worm-burners. Marquis went through the same process, though not as radically. His fastball use went down (58% career, 49.5% in 2009) and his cutter rate increased (7.8% career, 13.3% in 2009).

Marquis profiles in a very similar way beyond the cutter/fastball split. He also sports a below-average K/9 (5.25 career, 4.79 in 2009), a reasonable BB/9 (3.50 career, 3.33 in 2009), and induces the groundball well. In fact, his groundball rate is elite – it was third best among qualified starters (sandwiched between Derek Lowe and Chris Carpenter). So why do I like Piniero more than Marquis?

Perhaps its the fact that Piniero’s walk rate (2.56 career, 1.14 in 2009) is a second ‘tool’ of his, where Marquis doesn’t boast a second aspect in his statistical profile that shows up elite. If you barely walk anyone and keep the ball on the ground, you can succeed. If you walk about as many as the average pitcher (2009 average: 3.46, Marquis: 3.33) and keep the ball on the ground, you’ll just be okay. Piniero’s walk rate has also limited his bad years – he hasn’t ever had a negative valuation on FanGraphs – while Marquis has had worse years, more recently (he sported a negative $2.5 million number in 2006). It looks like Marquis is more volatile while Piniero’s basement is more valuable. I’ll take the steadier guy for the middle of my rotation.

Once again, though, we are left wondering if chasing the groundball is what the Mets should be doing. They own a big park that suppresses fly balls. Why not go after someone like Chris Young from the Padres, who owns a much better strikeout rate and just happens to own a fly ball rate (52.9%) that makes him less appealing? If not Young, why not apply that same approach and find other under-valued fly-ball pitchers that would enjoy calling Citi Field home? That way, you don’t have to feed at the same trough as everyone else. Try that out, Omar, you might like it.

Leave a comment   |  tags: , , , , , | posted in Uncategorized

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 321 other followers