Archive - San Diego Padres RSS Feed

Barrett’s ability to handle a staff…

June 22, 2007 in fielding, San Diego Padres with 0 Comments

Since the trade for Michael Barrett, I’ve heard a lot about his relationship with his pitching staff and his game calling ability. I think that some kind of “game calling ability” does exist, but it’s one of those things that is tough to quantify. A couple of scouts or random pitchers just doesn’t do it for me (although it probably does mean something). So I attempted to take a quick look at Barrett and how pitchers performed with him catching to see if anything significant came out. I used Catchers ERA (CERA) to compare Barrett with the rest of the Cubbies catchers over the last 4 years. CERA is simply the ERA of the pitchers when that catcher is behind the plate. So here’s what came out:

07
Barrett’s CERA: 4.17
Other Cub catchers CERA: 3.29

06
Barrett: 4.57
Other: 4.97

05
Barrett: 4.45
Other: 3.58

04
Barrett: 3.88
Other: 3.62

Total
Barrett: 4.26
Other: 4.09

Since 2004, with Cubs not named Barrett (largely Henry Blanco) behind the plate, pitchers saw their ERA check in .17 runs lower. This strikes me as not a very big deal. Much of it, if not all, could probably just be explained by random fluctuation. And a more rigorous attempt to study this (adjusted for actual pitchers caught and the like) could easily decrease the gap. And even if we accepted that Barrett was -.17 runs per 9 in “game calling” it really wouldn’t be that big of a deal. In short, he hasn’t disrupted the Cubs’ staff over the years — at least not by ERA during their appearances.

Padres pickup catcher Barrett

June 20, 2007 in San Diego Padres, trades with 0 Comments

The Padres traded Rob Bowen and outfield prospect Kyler Burke to the Cubs for Michael Barrett and cash today. Already having the best pythagorean record in all of baseball, the Padres get even better with this move.

 Barrett has hit .267/.325/.431 for his career. Offensively, he really didn’t break out until 2004.  He improved every year from 04 to 06 with his OPS+ going from 105 to 113 to 121 (and rising wOBA’s of .347, .351, and .373). So far this year, in 231 PA, he’s struggled a bit with the bat hitting .256/.307/.427. He’s not going to help out much in containing the running game, though. He’s thrown out just 7 of 39 (18%) base stealers this year, 73 of 336 since 04 (22%), and 506 of 658 for his career (23%). That being said, he instantly makes the Padres a better team. A catcher platoon of Bard/Barrett could be one of the more productive ones in the NL. He (or Bard) will also provide more depth on a bench in need of some depth. I kind of hope Black doesn’t “save” whichever catcher isn’t starting that night in case of an injury to the other catcher. When you have two good offensive backstops it really hurts you to do that, especially when guys like Geoff Blum are hitting with the game on the line.

Even though Burke is struggling mightily in Fort Wayne, I really wish he wasn’t included in the trade. He’s one of the few “high upside” prospects the Padres have (or had). The Padres reluctancy to draft — or hold onto — high school prospects is somewhat of a cause for concern (at least to me, anyway).

But, overall, I can’t argue with this deal. With the way things are shaking out (like having one of the best run differentials in baseball) the Padres are looking like a serious contenders this year. This may be the type of move that nets them an extra win or two down the stretch to help win a tough division. And maybe there are still more moves to come…

Coolstandings says…

June 16, 2007 in projections, Sabermetrics, San Diego Padres with 2 Comments

Coolstandings is a site that predicts division and playoffs chances for each team. They simulate 1 million seasons and use a team’s pythagorean record to predict future performance. As I said back there, I’m not sure if this is the best way to do it, but it’s still some awesome stuff. Basically, I think there would need to be some kind of regression component put into place. For instance, let’s say a team was expected to score 5 runs a game, but started the season scoring 3 runs per game through 20 games. We should assume that they will regress toward their preseason projections and therefore probably use something closer to 5 rpg for the remaining simulation. There is some extensive discussion over on The Book Blog. But, anyway, here’s what they predict for the division:

Padres: 73.9%
Dodgers: 18%
Dbacks: 5.1%
Giants: 2%
Rockies: 1%

So, despite being just a half game up (before today’s game), the Padres are clear favorites according to Coolstandings. And that’s because of this:

Run Differential
Padres: 72
Dodgers: 29
Dbacks: -1
Giants: 16
Rockies: -24

So far the Padres have clearly played the best baseball of any team in the division. And that’s why CS is telling us that they are the clear favorites the rest of the way. However, while I think it’s *very* encouraging that they’ve played this well (by run differential), I still think that the 74% division winner number is unrealistic.

PECOTA predicted Arizona to win 88 games and San Diego 86. Now, we’re sitting here 65 games into the season and they’re separated by 2 games – and you’re telling me the Padres will win the division 74% of the time and Arizona only 5%? I can’t buy that. But one thing is for sure: this should be a great race down the stretch as things heat up. And for the record, I think the Padres will come out on top : )

Padres to call up Chase Headley

June 15, 2007 in prospects, San Diego Padres with 0 Comments

It looks like the Padres are going to call up top 3b prospect Chase Headley tomorrow. We’ll see what materializes with Kouzmanoff and the DL, but it would seem as if Headley will get some extended playing time here.  

In AA San Antonio he was tearing the cover off the ball to the tune of .357/.433/.648. His BABiP is .422 explaining some of that high average. But he’s still walking in 13% of his PA’s and carrying a robust .291 ISO.

That being said, it does strike me as somewhat of a strange move. Branyan is the perfect guy to fill in for a week or two without having to worry about the development of Headley. It seems as if there is a disconnect between the front office and Bud Black when it comes to Branyan. If he’s not going to play — because Black apparently doesn’t like him — he really shouldn’t be on the team. Nonetheless, Headley gets an early chance to show his stuff. Perhaps, he’ll be the perfect spark plug for the offense and start at 3b the rest of the way out. Leaving Kouz to hold down left? And what about Russ? Free Russell Branyan once again!!!!

We may be getting a little ahead of ourselves, though….

Thoughts on Chris Young

June 15, 2007 in Sabermetrics, San Diego Padres with 3 Comments

Chris Young is one of the most fascinating pitchers in the game. He’s 6’10”, he seems like an articulate guy, and he’s in the process of defying his fielding independent pitching stats again.

A few years back, sabermetrician Voros McCracken did some work that changed the baseball analysis community. He found that mlb pitchers, as a group, have little control over their BABiP (batting average on balls in play). Once the pitcher delivers the ball and once it’s hit into play, there is little the pitcher can do about whether it turns into an out or not (at least, in general). Since Voros’ findings, there have been many looks at BABiP and defense independent pitching stats. The general theory has held, although, not without slight modifications. Pitchers do have some control over their BABiP because they also have some control over how balls are put into play against them. Fly ball pitchers generally are able to suppress their BABiP’s a little because fly balls are more easily caught than other balls in play. Still, although they do have some control, the degree of which is considered quite minimal. Pitchers BABiP’s should be regressed a long way back towards the mean (MGL, PDF file) – while, on the other hand, their peripheral stats like strikeouts and walks should not be regressed so heavily to the mean. This is because of the unsustainability of pitchers, as a group, to “control” their BABiP to a significant degree year in and year out.

And this is part of the reason why Chris Young is an interesting case to look at. First off, he’s an extreme fly ball pitcher (here’s his fangraphs page with all the gory details). Since the start of his career, 461 innings worth, he has a 52.1% fly ball percentage. He’s also allowed 30% grounders and 17.9% line drives. We can already see some signs that would point to a lower BABiP than the average pitcher. He hasn’t allowed too many line drives and he’s allowed a ton of fly balls.

However, last year was still very much a fluke. In 04 his BABiP was .278, in 05 it was .304, so far this year it’s at .267. In 06 it was an unbelievably low .237. Among qualified pitchers from 2003 to 2006, that .237 mark is the lowest posted. So last year Young saw his share of luck. Last year, though, the Padres team BABiP was .282 (well below the league average level of ~ .300). So for Young, it was luck, defense, park, distribution of batted balls against, etc, etc. He played some part in that low BABiP, but a lot of it was still “luck” and factors out of his control that were involved.

Fast forward to this year: His BABiP, like I mentioned before, has predictably risen to .267, though that’s still well below average (but, at least, much closer to it). But believe it or not, he’s getting lucky again this year, but in another way. This year he’s allowed just 2.7 home runs per 100 fly balls allowed. The average is about 11 and Young’s career average is 8.3 counting this year. A rate of 2.7% hr/fb is certainly considered unsustainable, at least for any extended time period. Consider the lowest mark from 03-06 among qualified starters: 6.2% hr/fb (by Dontrelle Willis). Once again, even when the BABiP has regressed a bit, Young still finds himself getting his ample share of “luck” over the given sample of performance. If CY had a 8% hr/fb ratio this year, he would have given up closer to 9 home runs, instead, he’s allowed just 3. This should have quite a drastic effect on his ERA when some balls start flying over fences.

Finally, let’s look at how Young has outperformed his FIP (fielding independent pitching) thus far throughout his career:

—-FIP ERA (FIP-ERA)
04 5.21 4.71 .5
05 3.48 4.26 -.78
06 4.66 3.46 1.20
07 3.26 2.34 . 92

You can see that over the past two years he’s significantly outperformed his FIP’s. Like with Barry Zito, however, there comes a point when we have to wonder when the luck starts becoming skill (or at least how much of it). Perhaps some new batted ball data or the new mlb enhanced gameday features will help us better understand CY. Is he able to induce weaker contact consistently? Why? His height, his arm angle? These are questions I’m sure the Padres are trying to answer right now. I’ve suggested dealing Young before as I don’t think his value could be higher than it is now. And I think his perceived value (in the form of his ERA) versus his predicted value (more in the form of DIPS type statistics) is a long way apart. He is, however, a key guy in the rotation and still a fine pitcher even if the expected regressions take place. Young is a case that deserves some real hardcore research. Very well might not be me doin’ it, but we’ll see as we go along here.

Page 120 of 120« First...90100110«116117118119120