In an article taking note of sub replacement level players starting for big league teams, BPro throw their hat in the "Astros third base situation is scary" ring:
Since 2003...Blum has deteriorated into an inadequate option even off of the bench: he's been under a .300 OBP in five of six seasons, batting .247/.300/.371 in that stretch, covering more than 2,000 plate appearances. The idea that he can be a regular third baseman is ridiculous. The Astros would be better off moving Miguel Tejada over and starting Tommy Manzella's glove at shortstop. That alignment would be a significant defensive upgrade, something a team with the Astros' low-strikeout rotation could use.
While Manzella has been touted for his glove work, his minor league numbers would surely negate much (if not all) of the advantage his glove would give the Astros. After Edwin Maysonet's spring, his defense at this point shouldn't be the deciding factor in not promoting him to the big league club. Manzella is a superior defender, but he'd be a poor man's Adam Everett, and could be much worse.
As Only a Lad noted in the comments, it appears that BPro didn't do sufficient research in at least this portion of their article. Tommy Manzella, as far as I can tell, has never been a real option for the big league team, and was sent down weeks ago.
Later in the article, the Chicago White Sox centerfield conundrum is written about. Jerry Owens is listed as a potential part of a platoon in center, but he has been released. I don't know if the Prospectus article came out before or after his release today, and I may be picking nits, but that's another part of the article that could be construed as failing in the research department. Again, this may just be an Astros fan who is getting upset for the sake of getting upset, and Prospectus has been an invaluable tool for my and others' learning about the game of baseball. However, after the Pedro false trade rumor this is sort of disheartening to see from an organization like Baseball Prospectus.
The article goes on to detail another area where the Astros will struggle- starting pitching:
Come to think of it, we could include that rotation, which includes Mike Hampton, Brian Moehler, and Russ Ortiz, as a segment unto itself within this piece.
0 recs | 15 comments
While I think the idea is an intriguing one (though also one that's been kicked around plenty of times around here)
I really wish the BPro writers did a better job with their own research. It seems to me that, in an attempt to go for the FJM-style evisceration of GMs for laughs, they often fuck up their analysis. For instance:
It’s interesting to me that, while Sheehan concedes Bocock’s defensive ability, he totally fails to do his research. By BPro’s own WARP3 metric (which takes into account defense), Bocock posted a .6 WARP. Essentially replacement level, but there have been many, many players who have gotten time at the ML level in the last decade. Jose Vidro during last season comes to mind. And in an article about “sub-replacement level” players, perhaps it would be worthwhile to talk about players who are actually sub-replacement level.
Only_A_Lad - March 30, 2009
and, for that matter,
Blum projects as essentially replacement level. So fuck you, Sheehan. I’m tired of your shit, and I’ve been tired of it for a year now.
Only_A_Lad - March 30, 2009
I love that attitude
Stephen Higdon - March 30, 2009
I can't believe I pay them for this shit
fangraphs has better analysis, and they give it away for free. I’m just going to switch my subscription to the fantasy stuff this year. They do great projections for batters and pitchers, but I’m not going to keep paying them for analysis when this is the crap they churn out.
Only_A_Lad - March 30, 2009
Moehler was basically league average last year
Which is better than replacement level, if I understand the concept of replacement level correctly.
I won’t be renewing with BPro in the future, I don’t think.
AstroAndy - March 30, 2009
to be fair about moehler
they project him as a below-replacement starter (-0.2 WARP). His weighted mean has him as a swingman out of the bullpen, and sees him as slightly above replacement (0.4 WARP). So it’s possible for him to have a positive contribution, but not as a full-time starter.
Ortiz pretty much has the same profile – spot starts and a place in the bullpen make him a replacement-level pitcher. Same thing for Hampton.
The starting rotation does look really, really ugly when run through PECOTA, and it will probably be worse when all three are expected to be full-time starters. But it will probably come out to be replacement level at the end of the season.
Only_A_Lad - March 30, 2009
It's difficult
for projection systems to handle players like Ortiz, Moehler, and Hampton because their recent histories are spotted with large chunks of missing time and role changes. It’s much easier to project players who have gotten consistent playing time doing the same job and have done so recently. But Ortiz has barely played 100 innings since Opening Day 2006 and Hampton has only played in the neighborhood of 150 innings since Opening Day 2005. They’re rehab projects.
Moehler was a reliever for us in 2007 and rotation for most of 2008, and has ERA projections as low as 4.04 (CHONE) and as high as 4.97 (ZiPS). His fielding independent pitching has been in the neighborhood of league average (~4.5) the last two years for us, so it seems odd to me that BPro/Pecota is predicting worse than replacement level, which in 2008 was an ERA around 5.15. Could it happen? Yeah. But I think BPro is guilty here of writing from pre-conceived notions and not from a studied inquiry. It was a throwaway line inserted for the purpose taking a potshot at a popular team to take potshots at.
AstroAndy - March 30, 2009
the astros
are quickly becoming the “airline food” joke of the NBA. There’s a punchline, but it’s not really a funny one, and all it does is tell your reader that you’re kinda lazy.
Only_A_Lad - March 30, 2009
uhhhhhh
“they’re old!”
“ed wade is their gm!”
“remember those rainbow uni’s??”
“berkman and lee are fat!”
“geoff blum starts for them!”
When we win 79-83 games this season, and the sleeper darlings all win 74, 75, the Sabermetric think tanks will be silent, or chalk it up to outproducing our pythagorean record…
when the dbacks did it two seasons back, everyone made it out to be wonderful- a plucky bunch of youngsters playing above their heads!
when we did it last year, it was just delaying the inevitable decline of the astros franchise…
Evan Hochschild - March 30, 2009
as much as I hate to bitch about my fellow stat-heads
(though I suppose critiquing them is the essence of being one) that’s exactly how I feel about it. Every time I read about the pythag record thing, I keep thinking about the 2006 A’s. They, too, significantly outperformed their pythagorean record (by 8 wins, as opposed to the Astros’ 9) and made the playoffs.
Of course, that was another well-constructed Billy Beane team: merely okay offense and pitching, but they had a great defense to support that staff and a spectacular bullpen which allowed them to win close games. Beane’s roster construction exploited the inherent value of a good bullpen and defense.
Compare that to the Astros: their offense and starting pitching were alright, but their defense and bullpen made them luck out and win a few extra games. Ed Wade clearly has no idea what the hell he’s doing.
That’s what it comes down to. Beane built the first team, so it must be another fine example of sabermetric glory. Wade made the second, so it must be crap.
I just wish a writer out there (besides one of the local suck-ups) would notice that, while this team will probably suck to high hell, the Astros franchise isn’t quite as god-awful as things seem at first glance, and the Astros actually did accomplish something last year. Maybe they can’t accomplish those things again – maybe Tejada won’t be as good of a defender, maybe the bullpen won’t be as effective – but it seems inappropriate to simply call that accomplishment luck for one and an example of good baseball for another.
Only_A_Lad - March 30, 2009
residue of design
and all that
Only_A_Lad - March 30, 2009
joke of the MLB, even
Only_A_Lad - March 30, 2009
While I agree with the idea that Blum shouldn't be a starter at 3d base...
I agree with Only_A_Lad’s point that Blum is not sub-replacement level. Blum is not a good offensive player. I agree with that. But he is a very good defensive player at 3d base. His UZR/150 was +11.5 at 3d base last year, and his career UZR/150 at 3d base is +7.5. That’s why he isn’t sub-replacement level.
That’s also why BP’s suggestion of moving Tejada to 3d base and putting Manzella at shortstop isn’t much of an improvement. Blum isn’t a good hitter, but he is better than Manzella. If Tejada has a defensive effort at shortstop similar to last year, then Manzella won’t improve the defense at that position. And it is doubtful that Tejada will improve on Blum’s defense at 3d base.
clack - March 30, 2009
In contrast with BPro
mlbtraderumors gives a relatively even-handed review of the Astros’ offseason.
The comments on the other hand…
Just do yourself a favor and skip the comments.
AstroAndy - March 30, 2009
perspective
Remember this is a few people who met on usenet and turned it into a money making venture. I think Sheehan is a New Yorker and a couple of others are Chicagoans. Some of the stuff written by Kahrl about the Brewers was so bad that I can’t describe it without a moderator flagging me for bad language. The stuff about the Astros probably reads well for people who aren’t informed.
Sadly stuff likes this gets read and repeated endlessly on blogs and forums as truth.
ol Pete - March 30, 2009
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of The Crawfish Boxes to post a comment.