Offensive Reality
76-86
741 Runs Scored, 11th in the AL
Team OBP = .338, 6th in the AL
Team SLG = .407, 11th in the AL
It has been 12 years since the A’s have scored so few runs. Why did this happen? The ridiculous number of injuries in 2007 certainly had an impact on the productivity of the offense but it would be a mistake to place too much emphasis on the injury factor. Yes, the A’s used 30 different position players during the 2007 season but several of them made unexpectedly positive contributions on offense. The harsh reality is that the A’s fielded a below-average offense for much of the season even when they were playing their 1st string line-up. What I originally wanted to know was exactly how much offense the A’s got from each position. I’m sorry, but when a team sends 12 guys out to play CF it gets a little difficult to intuitively know how much offensive production the A’s were getting from the spot.

Most of you are familiar with OPS+. For those who aren’t, OPS+ is a metric designed to weigh league and park factors in order to create a league average performance level. You can then compare a player’s OPS to the rest of the league and determine how good his performance actually was. Average is always considered 100; therefore if a player’s OPS is 5% better than league average he’ll get a score of 105. If his performance is 5% worse than league average he’ll get a score of 95. Simply stated, the more players in a line-up with an above-average OPS+ score the better the line-up will be. In 2007 the New York Yankees led the AL (and the majors) in runs scored with 968. It should come as no surprise then that the Yankees line-up regularly featured 7-8 players with well above average OPS+.
The purpose of OPS+ is to compare the performance of all batters without regard to their playing position. The problem with OPS+ is that it compares all batters without regard for their playing position. If you really want to know how good (or bad) a bat your starting SS has does it really make sense to compare his numbers to David Ortiz? Big Pappy had the 2nd highest OPS in baseball last year but he is not going to be playing SS for anyone. It makes more sense to compare your SS with the other guys in the league who have the skills to play the same position. You may have a SS who can hit 30 HR with a 900 OPS and that looks like a great advantage until you find out that every AL team has a SS with the same numbers. OPS+ says you have one of the best hitters in the game but you don’t have any real advantage at the SS position vs. your rivals. Therefore you’ll need to gain an advantage at another position in order to beat the other guy. So with that in mind I took the basic formula for OPS+ and refined the data to account only for hitters who played a like position. I call the results OPSp (p for positional). I’m pretty certain I’ve seen something like this before but it’s been a while and rather than try and track down the info I just rolled up my sleeves and did the math.
Since my original goal was to break down the offensive contributions by position I used the position splits provided by foxsports.com to distribute a player’s offense towards the tally of whichever defensive position he was playing. Nick Swisher, for example, has his season totals divided between RF, CF, 1B and DH. Heck, I even divided Dee Brown’s 3 AB for Oakland between RF and LF. I’m not going to provide links to all 30 players the A’s used in their 2007 line-ups because that would just be insane. I tallied up all the numbers and came up with what should be a 99.9% accurate representation of the offense the A’s got from the respective positions on the field. I also point out the primary offensive contributors at each position to better determine if the A’s are adequately manned at the spot in the coming years. I then took BP’s League Position Batting Stats and used them as a baseline to compare the A’s performance. A quick note while I’m talking about process. OPS+ weighs park factors before rating a player. My data pool contains every at bat from every player at each position; therefore I’m using both "inflated" and "depressed" components as part of the baseline. Using Baseball-Reference’s Park Factor ratings I quickly added up the batting rating for all 14 AL parks and came up with a league average of 100.21. Since 100 is a neutral mark (and assuming that I can actually get an accurate score by adding up all the park factors and dividing by 14) I decided that .21 wasn’t worth an extra step in my math. Nor do I use Park Factor as a multiplier for the A’s numbers. I’ve already accounted for park factor while creating the baseline which includes all the A’s data and to use the multiplier twice seems unnecessary. The Coliseum was a particularly tough place to hit last year but then again if a player struggles to hit in Oakland than maybe he shouldn’t be on the roster of the team that plays half their games there.
Anyways, on to the data. The 1st line will identify the position and give the league average numbers according to BP. The 2nd line represents the A’s cumulative production for that position and the overall OPSp. The rest will be dedicated to discussing individual players of note regarding the position.
LF: AL Average 335 OBP/426 Slugging = 761 OPS
Team: 346 OBP/400 Slugging = 746 OPS (OPSp = 97.2)
Shannon Stewart: 576 AB 290/345/394 739 OPS (OPSp = 95.5)
Shannon Stewart epitomizes the underwhelming nature of the A’s 2007 offense. Oakland got more than they had any right to expect out of Stewart, spending $1 million on a back-up and ending up with a full time starter. His numbers look fine on the surface and he sports a 101 OPS+ but when you compare him to other LFer’s his production is 4.5% weaker than the average. Shannon Stewart, bright light that he was in the Oakland line-up, was a below average hitter relative to his position. The main problem with Stewart is he lacks power. He has hit more than 13 HR in his career exactly once, although to be fair he was on pace for a 17 HR season in 2004 if he had managed a full season. At his best, Stewart was a gap hitter capable of 40+ doubles a year. That did a lot to make up for his lack of HR clout. Stewart still shows the pop to hit 10-12 HR a year but he’s not driving the ball into the gaps like he used to. He hasn’t hit 30 doubles in a season since 2003 and he played full seasons in ’05 and ’07. Nor was he on pace to reach 30 doubles in ’04 or ’06. Stewart turns 34 next year, he has a history of foot problems and he’s shown diminished power over the last 4 seasons. It seems a stretch to think that he’s got anywhere to go but down.
And the A’s are talking about bringing him back?
I’m sorry, but that would be a commitment to mediocrity. That’s the kind of bonehead move the Washington Nationals would make, our GM is supposed to be smarter than that. Stewart’s 2007 season should have been enough to earn him a multi-year deal worth somewhere around $5 million annual. That may not sound like a lot of money (or commitment) but we’re talking about a player you’re going to want to see less and less of if you want to see the A’s get better. We’re already at that point so there’s no reason to waste the time, the resources and roster space on someone who cannot be expected to offer even average offensive production at his position. Here’s another fun fact. That league average 761 OPS was the lowest total produced in the last 5 years so that number is probably going to go up next year. I don’t see any reason to think Stewart would be able to catch up.
CF: AL Average 340 OBP/414 Slugging = 754 OPS
Team: 332 OBP/379 Slugging = 711 OPS (OPSp = 89.1)
Nick Swisher: 211 AB 261/370/479 849 OPS (OPSp = 124.5)
Mark Kotsay: 206 AB 214/279/296 575 OPS (OPSp = 53.6)
Turns out, CF wasn’t the deep, dark black hole I was expecting it to be offensively. Thank Swisher for that. Bad news is, it sounds like Mark Kotsay gets first dibs at the job in 2008. That’s a problem because unless he can return to (at least) his 2005 form with the bat Mr. Kotsay will provide another below-average offensive contributor to the line-up. And don’t even think about him getting traded before the season starts. Kotsay’s got an $8 million price tag and a balky back that cost him most of 2007 that combo makes him fugly to potential suitors. I’m sorry, but no one is going to get that drunk at the Winter Meetings!
I’ve got a question.
Can Nick Swisher play CF as a full time gig?
RF: AL Average 359 OBP/465 Slugging = 824 OPS
Team: 372 OBP/444 Slugging = 816 OPS (OPSp = 99.1)
Travis Buck: 210 AB 276/368/467 835 OPS (OPSp = 102.9)
Nick Swisher: 173 AB 254/368/393 761 OPS (OPSp = 92.4)
Jack Cust: 159 AB 270/431/566 997 OPS (OPSp = 141.8)
RF was the AL’s offensive powerhouse last year and the A’s did OK. Thank Cust for that. Swisher’s power outage in June coincided with Kotsay’s return to CF. Coincidence? Maybe. Swisher finished the year with an 836 OPS, his poor showing while playing RF last year was a fluke, nothing more. Either he or Travis Buck would provide the A’s with average or better offense in RF next year.
1B: AL Average 348 OBP/443 Slugging = 791 OPS
Team: 366 OBP/436 Slugging = 802 OPS (OPSp = 103.6)
Team (-): 357 OBP/409 Slugging = 766 OPS (OPSp = 94.9)
Dan Johnson: 356 AB 233/344/404 748 OPS (OPSp = 90.1)
Daric Barton: 72 AB 347/429/639 1068 OPS (OPSp = 167.5)
I didn’t include Swisher’s numbers because there is no way Swish will spend much time at 1B next year as long as Cust and Barton are on the roster. But you’ll notice that I include two sets of team stats for the A’s. The top score was the final cumulative OPS, the bottom score reflects what the A’s 1st basemen had accomplished before Daric Barton came to Oakland. That’s right, Barton’s wild September lifted the overall total almost 9 points. That 802 OPS is a lie of sorts, for the first 5 months of the season Oakland was receiving below-average offensive production from 1B. If there is one position on the diamond where offense takes 1st and 2nd priority it is 1B and if Daric Barton hadn’t come into town hitting like Pedro Cerrano, Roy Hobbs and Steve Nebraska all rolled into one then I think Beane’s #1 priority would have been to find a 1st baseman who could hit worth a damn.
Speaking of Daric Barton, a lot of people are content with having him in the 2008 line-up. Now I don’t have a problem with Barton being in next year’s line-up but that sense of contentedness bothers me. I don’t think the Barton we see in 2008 will be the same guy we saw last September. The guy we saw in September posted a 1068 OPS in 72 AB, which was 241 points higher than he managed in his 5 month stint in AAA last year. To this day, Daric Barton has never hit more than 13 HR in a season since turning pro. The power surge he showed in September should be considered just that – a surge. It seems unrealistic to expect or even hope for similar production over the course of the 2008 season. I’m counting Barton as being an asset next year, but let’s not get carried away. He’s got the on-base skills and gap power to be an above-average hitter at 1B next year but no more than that.
DH: AL Average 355 OBP/447 Slugging = 802 OPS
Team: 358 OBP/463 Slugging = 821 OPS (OPSp = 104.4)
Mike Piazza: 298 AB 282/319/426 745 OPS (OPSp = 85.2)
Jack Cust: 192 AB 245/390/484 874 OPS (OPSp = 118.2)
Let us give thanks and praise to Jack Cust. He split his at bats between LF, RF and DH and it was his production that allowed the A’s to post average numbers in RH and above average numbers at DH. Ultimately though, when 2007 was said and done Mike Piazza was another reason why the A’s offense was so unproductive. He had more at bats as the DH than anyone and his numbers were poor. Piazza was 38, switching leagues and had someone atomic drop his shoulder into hamburger so I’ll refrain from calling him a bust. At the same time, I’ve got no problem saying "see ya".
3B: AL Average 334 OBP/427 Slugging = 761 OPS
Team: 334 OBP/429 Slugging = 763 OPS (OPSp = 100.3)
Eric Chavez: 340 AB 241/307/447 754 OPS (OPSp = 96.6)
Jack Hannahan: 144 AB 278/369/424 793 OPS (OPSp = 109.8)
What kind of numbers could a healthy Eric Chavez put up? Will we ever get to find out? And how many licks does it take to get to the Tootsie roll center of a Tootsie pop? The world may never know.
C: AL Average 318 OBP/395 Slugging = 713 OPS
Team: 299 OBP/340 Slugging = 639 OPS (OPSp = 80.1)
Jason Kendall: 292 AB 226/261/281 542 OPS (OPSp = 53.2)
Kurt Suzuki: 204 AB 245/326/412 738 OPS (OPSp = 106.8)
Jason Kendall.
Yech!
Jason LaRue managed to work himself into a platoon job in KC for a while, but for all intents and purposes when Jason Kendall was Oakland’s starting Catcher he was the worst hitting starter at his position in all of baseball.
I feel very confident in Kurt Suzuki’s ability to provide at least league average offense from the Catcher position starting in 2008. Eventually he could produce well above average numbers but I will not burden him that expectation next year.
2B: AL Average 339 OBP/416 Slugging = 755 OPS
Team: 325 OBP/435 Slugging = 760 OPS (OPSp = 100.7)
Mark Ellis: 582 AB 277/336/442 778 OPS (OPSp = 105.4)
Less than 50 AB went to Oakland 2nd basemen not named Mark Ellis. You know, if you want to blame something or someone for giving me the idea to write this diary, blame anyone who called Mark Ellis the best 2B in the AL last year. He’s certainly a good player and the defensive metrics all call him "Daddy" but a 105.4 OPSp raises a questioning flag. 6 2nd basemen posted a higher OPS in the AL, including Placido Polanco who’s 846 OPS was almost 70 points higher than that of Mark Ellis. THT’s RZR says Polanco was the 2nd best defensive 2B in the AL and while he was clearly a step behind Ellis his 52 point OBP advantage makes up some (if not all) of that lost ground.
Mark Ellis was a barely above average offensive player and his OBP percentage was actually 3 points below league average. His advantage can be traced directly to his career high in HR and doubles. If you think Ellis can duplicate his power stroke in 2008 than no worries. If you suspect otherwise....
SS: AL Average 322 OBP/391 Slugging = 713 OPS
Team: 289 OBP/358 Slugging = 647 OPS (OPSp = 81.4)
Bobby Crosby: 349 AB 226/278/341 619 OPS (OPSp = 73.5)
Marco Scutaro: 146 AB 247/313/308 621 OPS (OPSp = 76)
Donnie Murphy: 111 AB 234/306/468 774 OPS (OPSp = 114.7)
Marco Scutaro: 338 Total AB 260/332/361 693 OPS (OPSp = 84.7)
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
The A’s options include A-Rod at $30 million annual, trade for a SS or live with Donnie Murphy’s short range and hope his bat continues to develop.
Anything else requires more magical pixie dust than is currently available.
If the A’s insist on putting Bobby Crosby in to the 2008 starting line-up than Beane should dedicate the season to loading up on young talent in an effort to rebuild the roster and the farm system. You do not win baseball games with Bobby Crosby in the starting line-up. You win in spite of him. A few days ago Nico wrote a piece that called Crosby an above-average defensive SS with a below-average bat and suggested that the A’s could do worse.
Crosby was the worst hitting starting SS in the major leagues last year.
Conclusions
There were several reasons why the A’s fielded such an inept offense last season. They got below-average production out of LF and prior to Daric Barton’s call-up, 1B. They got poor production out of their primary DH. They gave starting roles to the worst hitting Catcher and SS in the AL and while giving another 200+ at bats to one of the weakest hitting CFers. 3B and RF offered only average production and those numbers were only met by the achievements of players who started the 2007 season in other organizations.
Some of the problems have already been corrected. Kendall is gone and Piazza should soon follow. With any luck Shannon Stewart will be let go and replaced by a full season of Travis Buck. Hannahan is in place to back up 3B if Chavez isn’t ready to go in April. Cust and Barton will have their names in the Opening Day line-up.
Unfortunately I can see the A’s standing pat with the rest of the roster. I can see the following line-up card and it worries me.
C: Suzuki (106.8 OPSp)
1B: Barton (110.7 OPSp)* Estimate based on his AAA performance
2B: Ellis (105.4 OPSp)
3B: Chavez/Hannahan (100.3 OPSp)* No clue what April will bring
SS: Crosby (73.5 OPSp)
LF: Buck (123.8 OPSp)* 07 Totals weighed vs. AL position average
CF: Kotsay (53.6 OPSp)
RF: Swisher (103.9 OPSp)* 07 Totals weighed vs. AL position average
DH: Cust (127.7 OPSp)* 07 Totals weighed vs. AL position average
That leaves 2 huge black holes in the line-up and there are question marks surrounding the top 3 OPSp producers. It’s possible that the above line-up could be nearly as hamstrung as the 2007 version if the A’s catch a few bad breaks. Hey, in a perfect world Kotsay could surprise us and contribute near league average offense while Buck stays healthy, Cust is for real and Swisher continues to improve. Crosby will still suck with the bat but at least he offers a reliable glove for part of the season.
This leads me back to an earlier question. Can Swisher be an average defensive CF on a full time basis? Sure, it’s not the ideal defensive alignment but consider what it does to the line-up.
C: Suzuki (106.8 OPSp)
1B: Barton (110.7 OPSp)* Estimate based on his AAA performance
2B: Ellis (105.4 OPSp)
3B: Chavez/Hannahan (100.3 OPSp)* No clue what April will bring
SS: Crosby (73.5 OPSp)
LF: Buck (123.8 OPSp)* 07 Totals weighed vs. AL position average
CF: Swisher (122 OPSp)* 07 Totals weighed vs. AL position average
RF: Cust (122 OPSp)* 07 Totals weighed vs. AL position average
DH: TBD
I slipped Cust into RF just to show that there wouldn’t be any significant drop-off in his production if he was in the field. This opens up the DH slot for the A’s to find the best possible bat, thus strengthening the line-up further. Now I understand the desire to keep Cust away from a job that involves defense. I too would prefer if the A’s could find a hitter who could play a competent RF while swinging a potent bat, but we need to face facts: It’s a lot easier to find a bat who can smash and play DH than it is to find a bat that can smash and play RF. But if Swisher can handle CF than his presence creates a lot less pressure for Buck and Cust to produce. Add in an extra plus bat and you have the potential for a very good line-up.
Which after what we watched in 2007 would be a refreshing change.
0 recs |
155
comments
Read Related
Comments
Great diary - thanks!
A few comments:
- One thing I have to take issue with is the notion that no one will be that drunk at the Winter Meetings. I will. (Not there, of course, here.)
- Just to clarify, when I said a team "could do worse" than a good fielding / poor hitting SS I was not suggesting that Crosby is adequate (does anyone who reads AN think that? No), just that on the surface you can absorb that kind of player just fine at SS because it's primarily a defensive position. But that's IF the rest of your team can hit.
- Unfortunately, I do not believe Swisher can handle CF well enough to be considered for full-time duty. This is why either Denorfia has to be Billy's next great find, or we need to add a real CFer. And SS. And pony.
- I don't think Beane plans to bring Stewart back. I think when a guy has done a good job for you, you say "we'd be open to exploring you coming back..." before saying "hmm, looks like it won't fit but we really appreciate your contributions..." Plus, if Billy didn't at least do that we'd see 17 more "Beane's racist!" diaries before Festivus.
- Again, great diary. Wish our front page writers could produce something like this. Unless you have to be sober, in which case it's not worth it.
by Nico on Nov 10, 2007 7:14 PM PST 0 recs
Note to future writers...
Mention Nico in your diary and he'll give it a good review.
Point by point...
I know how you feel about Crosby. I was using your story to segue into taking another shot at Bobby. I used the "worst hitting SS in MLB" line before, therefore I had to referrence the source in order to justify the criticism.
Otherwise I just sound petty.
Swish in Cf... I'll address in a new post on the thread.
Stewart. I'd like to think that what the A's are doing is nothing more than helping out the guy by feigning interest to help drive up his price.
by grover on
Nov 10, 2007 10:03 PM PST
up
0 recs
Front paging other folks' diaries
I know it happens sometimes; this one would be a great candidate.
by oblique on
Nov 11, 2007 4:27 PM PST
up
0 recs
I like the way you think!
Whatya say TPTB?
by grover on
Nov 11, 2007 5:18 PM PST
up
0 recs
Interesting and well done
This is very well done. Here's a few questions: Does assuming that every person in the order is 100 mean that the team would come in 7th or 8th in the league in scoring and score a certain number of runs more than they actually did this year?
If that's the case, then it appears if one keeps your first 2008 lineup (with Cust at DH), and then substitutes an average-hitting CF (Denorfia?) and SS (?), where would the A's fall in the AL in runs scored and about how many more runs would they likely score in 2008 than in 2007? And, if the pitching held constant (though we hope it would improve), about how many more wins would that likely mean?
by SA on Nov 10, 2007 7:24 PM PST 0 recs
Interesting questions
Using 2007 data, an AL team that featured a line-up composed entirely of hitters with a perfect 100 rating would be expected to score 773.1 runs, rounding up to 774. That would have been good for 9th overall in the AL. Incidentally, that's 33 more runs than the A's scored last year.
Just off the top of my head, how a team did with RISP could have a noticable affect on Runs Scored. A team with poor RISP numbers, an inefficient team, would not score as many runs as would be expected by their OPS. A highly efficient offense could score more runs.
As for projecting 2008 Runs Scored totals, it would take more than slipping league average hitters into CF and SS to come up with an answer. For 1 thing you'd have to project Buck's and Cust's figures into a full season's worth of production.
I can say this.
Last year A's CFers scored 82 Runs. A league average CF scored 99.9 runs. A's SS scored 81 runs. A league average SS scored 80.4. What that all means, I'm not entirely sure.
by grover on
Nov 10, 2007 10:38 PM PST
up
0 recs
How did you come up with that 773?
by mikeA on
Nov 10, 2007 10:47 PM PST
up
0 recs
If my math is right...
I just divided the runs scored by each position by 14 then added all the numbers up. See BP's League Position Batting Stats.
by grover on
Nov 10, 2007 10:57 PM PST
up
0 recs
You're forgetting Denorfia
who is supposed to compete with (and hopefully win) the starting CF job with Kotsay.
So what if you put Denorfia in there instead of Kotsay, put Swisher in RF, Buck in Left, and Cust at DH? That would give us a lineup of;
1B Daric Barton
LF Travis Buck
RF Nick Swisher
DH Jack Cust
3B Eric Chavez
CF Chris Denorfia
2B Mark Ellis
C1 Kurt Suzuki
SS Black Hole
(or you could go with your lineup, but have Hanahan play LF, Buck play RF and Cust DH. The A's are supposed to be planning on playing Hanahan in the OF in ST).
by Zonis on Nov 10, 2007 7:35 PM PST 0 recs
You (almost) hurt my feelings
I didn't forget Denorfia, its just I focused on 2007 data and he did not provide any. Hey, TJ surgery does that sometimes.
I did very little projection in this piece and Denorfia requires a lot of projection. He's 27 years old and has all of 144 big league at bats. Sure, the minor league numbers give some hope but all that came before he had his elbow rebuilt. I'm personally hesitant to place expectations on the guy.
But, based on his big league numbers, if he played to the performance level he's (briefly) shown, his 2007 OPSp = 97.6. Sample size issues abound here. What happens once the league has a book on him?
I'm just not comfortable pinning a lot of hope on the guy this early.
by grover on
Nov 10, 2007 10:16 PM PST
up
0 recs
I'm hopeful also but fall short of starry eyed...
Denorfia goes into the season realistically as OF#4 or OF#5. He could catch fire, do it all and earn starting CFer but then, a minor leaguer could do the same and play him off the roster entirely.
A guy can hope
Kotsay's $7 million salary or not, I'm afraid his skills set has already slipped to the same MLB level: OF#4 or OF#5. I'll be happy to take those words back if he earns being a starter. In all honesty, ...IMO a Kendallesque decline began quite awhile ago.
...and we don't have Snelling to kick around anymore!
Probably earns 2008 Comeback Player
Straight A's on the diary!
I had similar thoughts but you took this to a much higher and deserving level,
...I'm enjoying it very much.
All except Cust's glove in RF & Swisher's in CF, our pitchers ERAs will take a significant hit
by A s Eh on
Nov 11, 2007 8:12 PM PST
up
0 recs
Prodigious diary
1] Is replacing Kotsay with a league average DH, while enduring the avert-your-eyes defense of a Swisher/Cust combo in CF/RF, really better than just replacing Kotsay with Denorfia?
2] Bobby Crosby is problematic.
3] You seem sort of blithe about putting Cust & Swish out there, but less sanguine about executing a similar offense/defense tradeoff at short (Murphy for Crosby). How come?
4] You said "there is no way Swish will spend much time at 1B next year as long as Cust and Barton are on the roster." What does Cust have to do with Swisher's time at 1B? If Barton is injured or ineffective, and DJ is gone, wouldn't Swish be likely to end up at first, at least semi-regularly? No evidence that the A's have contemplated Cust at first, unless I missed something.
5] In your view, which non-Barry Bonds player should/could/might fill the "DH: TBD" role in your second lineup scenario?
by 74mk on Nov 10, 2007 7:36 PM PST 0 recs
I can only watch so many strikeouts
and Cust has me at 101% if he repeats his 2007 rate
by One won lost won on
Nov 10, 2007 8:24 PM PST
up
0 recs
I'm with the group that doesn't
mind the strikeouts in general (I don't care how he gets out when he gets out if he can produce as well as he produced). What I do mind is certain situational strikeouts - specifically taking strike three in a sac fly situation.
If the pitch is good enough for the ump to interpret it as a strike, it's almost always good enough to put into play and product an RBI out. And I don't want to hear, "it was a tad off the plate," especially if it's up in the zone. Sac fly to LF, people! (Swisher did this a bunch in 2007 at the expense of my sanity.) Other than that, I don't really care about the Ks.
by Nico on
Nov 10, 2007 8:32 PM PST
up
0 recs
hmmm, too long for a t-shirt
(i;m with the group that doesn't mind strikeouts in general)
by ak_A on
Nov 10, 2007 9:18 PM PST
up
0 recs
answer to #4
I assumed that what Cust has to do with 1B is that Cust being on the team makes it that much less likely that they'll consider moving Barton to DH. (Not that I think there was much chance of that anyway.)
by iglew on
Nov 11, 2007 10:57 AM PST
up
0 recs
Point by point
- Denorfia didn't play in 2007 and requires a lot of projection. I didn't want to do that, I wanted to use last year's data to kind of illustrate the potential for next year.
- Crosby sucks.
- I'm not blithe (good word btw) on this subject matter, just more hesitant to substitute a lesser defender in the infield when at least 3/5 of the starting rotation has groundball tendencies.
- Shame on you for suggesting Barton gets hurt next year. I'm trying to think positive here and that means Barton and Cust will be healthy and productive next year.
- Lot's of guys could fill the hole. I'm still interested in Sexson (in a DH role) but after doing all this I'd really like to find someone who could play RF, bumping Swisher to CF and keeping Cust at DH.
by grover on
Nov 11, 2007 5:25 PM PST
up
0 recs
14 position players so far:
C: Suzuki (106.8 OPSp)
C: Bowen/Closser? (Unk OPSp)
-------------------------------------------
DH/RF: Cust (127.7/122 opsP)
1B: Barton (110.7 OPSp) power was a nice surprise
2B: Ellis (105.4 OPSp) Mr consistency
3B: Chavez (96.6 OPSp) This will be interesting
SS: Crosby (73.5 OPSp) Taking applications for SS
INF:Scutaro: (84.7 OPSp)
INF:Murphy: (114.7 OPSp)
-------------------------------------------
LF/3B:Hannahan (109.8/Unk.OPSp) Chavez Ins.
RF: Buck (123.8 OPSp)
CF: Swisher (122 OPSp)(RF: 103.9 OPSp)
OF#4: Denorfia (Unknown)
OF#5: Kotsay (53.6 OPSp) $7 million! Ow!
- 13 position players if DJ & Barton start in AAA with Chavez starting the season at 1B & Hannahan at 3B.
- If we can move Crosby or Kotsay we can save a spot. (Move both and we save two spots! :)
- If Denorfia starts at AAA we can save a roster spot.
by A s Eh on
Nov 11, 2007 11:09 PM PST
up
0 recs
Telling analysis
500 AB to players batting barely half the major league average at their positions ... that is just amazingly bad.
by green star oakland on Nov 10, 2007 7:50 PM PST 0 recs
Great diary
Someone should publish that stat.
I agree with the previous commenters. Swisher can't/won't play CF, and there's no (non-Bonds) scenario where Cust would be in the OF. Defense is important.
Denorfia should be a decent option, so if he gets the job, SS is the only real problem out of the 9. On the other hand, I think Cust, Buck, Suzuki, Ellis, (and obviously Barton) are likely to do a bit worse than last year. That leaves an averageish offense, I think, which is fine by me.
by mikeA on Nov 10, 2007 8:09 PM PST 0 recs
Thank you
As for publishing the OPSp stat, I know there are a couple folks on AN (salB comes to mind) who actually work for some baseball websites. If one of them thinks this is worth doing, then that would be kinda cool.
by grover on
Nov 11, 2007 8:53 PM PST
up
0 recs
Very good analysis
At some point I start glazing over on stats, but this diary worked well. Nice way you explained OPS.
I must add in my subscription to the notion that "hitting is contagious" as is a lack of successful hitting. I still feel Kendall's incredibly bad April-May-June (remember, he started the season as the Athletics leadoff hitter!) sunk the boat for the whole team (some affected more than others). You say it was the worst offense (runs scored) in twelve years; well, simply not having players watch their leadoff hitter fail miserably to the point that he gets demoted to the 9th slot (how many times in ML history has that happened??!!) in 2008 will make (IMHO) the 2007 team look 100% unrelated.
by One won lost won on Nov 10, 2007 8:18 PM PST 0 recs
I think guys have dropped
from leadoff to #9 fairly frequently throughout history - but not too often when they played in the NL. Didn't Kendall bat 9th at least once for the Cubs? If I'm remembering that right, how many guys have led off, and batted 9th in the NL, in the same season?
by Nico on
Nov 10, 2007 8:28 PM PST
up
0 recs
Julio Lugo in Boston last year...
would be another example of a guy who batted both leadoff and 9th in the order in the same season. Lots of times, that would be the most sensible place to bat a struggling prototyipcal leadoff guy (good speed and good OBP when playing well; no good hitting attribute when not playing well).
Kendall I think batted the NL-positional-player-equivalent of 9th (8th) with the Cubs, towards the end of the season...if that's what you meant, Nico. I don't think Piniella ever stooped to batting him behind Marquis or Zambrano or one of their good-hitting pitchers. As far as I know, LaRussa was the one manager last year who batted a non-pitcher 9th.
by Cutthemullet on
Nov 12, 2007 3:34 PM PST
up
0 recs
Micah Owings never batted 8th?
I can't really understand why you'd bat Augie Ojeda in front of Owings, but... maybe there's a reason for it.
by PaulThomas on
Nov 12, 2007 8:18 PM PST
up
0 recs
Dude should've batted cleanup
But that team didn't know how to fill out a lineup card anyway...if they did, Chris Young would've been fighting Owings for ABs in the 4th spot, not vying for leadoff HR records.
by Cutthemullet on
Nov 13, 2007 9:21 PM PST
up
0 recs
Julio Lugo batted 9th
Kendall had five .300+ seasons, plus two above .290.
I don't know that he was in the 9-hole like Lugo was, at any point prior to 2007.
Players who "compartmentalize" their experiences; that is, good or bad, put aside yesterday's result, and strive today to have an "outstanding day", are the most successful. I think Kendall's poor performance had an eroding effect on the whole team (to greater or lesser degrees) as far as "compartmentalizing" Kendall's Krisis, game to game, and the team batting suffered.
The above is "unquantifiable", yes, and simply an exercise in trying to suss out the "intangibles".
by One won lost won on
Nov 13, 2007 9:13 PM PST
up
0 recs
there was another Kendall demotion...
but it was over the course of two seasons. In 2005, he batted leadoff regularly, maybe every time he was in the lineup. But after that didn't work out so well in 2005, Kendall found himself batting 8th at the start of the 2006 season (with Swish batting 9th, and Crosby batting 3rd...boy, those early-2006 boxscores look strange). Later in the year he was hitting leadoff again. Anyway, it's not like he was cemented in the leadoff spot prior to 2007. If you're going to argue that moving from 1st to 9th in the order was nothing new for Lugo this year and therefore (I assume) it didn't hurt his psyche as much, or something, well, it wasn't the first time for Kendall, either. And I don't think the performance of the other guys suddenly improved markedly once Kendall became a Cub. If it did, we wouldn't have this diary.
by Cutthemullet on
Nov 13, 2007 9:39 PM PST
up
0 recs
heh
Having gone to thebaseballcube.com to look at boxscores, it appears the site stopped keeping track of the 2007 A's after 150 games...Lew Wolff needs to sponsor the page, or something.
by Cutthemullet on
Nov 13, 2007 9:48 PM PST
up
0 recs
thoughtful as ever
nice work.
I agree with other comments that the easiest solution is wishing Donorfia into a good CF, or at least half of an effective platoon.
SS is a problem until proven otherwise.
To this day, Daric Barton has never hit more than 13 HR in a season since turning pro
slight quibble: Barton homered in the exhibition game between the Rivercats and A's, hit 9 with the Rivercats, 4 in the first round of the AAA playoffs and then 4 with the A's. That's 18 HR, not all of which "count", but they are legit for figuring a moderate power total next season. That's along with about 50 doubles. I prefer to spend this off season under the impression that Barton has moderate, improving power.
by jakarta on Nov 10, 2007 8:30 PM PST 0 recs
We can all agree and still be happy,
by using my projection: I don't see more than low to very moderate power from Barton in 2008, but I could see him hitting .300 with an ample propensity for hitting doubles. And I think we'd all take that in a heartbeat.
by Nico on
Nov 10, 2007 8:34 PM PST
up
0 recs
Too pessimistic
I predict Barton will simultaneously play above average SS and CF, hit .390/.550/.800, mediate the Writer's Guild strike, develop a cure for acne, fully replace all the grit we traded away to the Cubs, post regularly on AN, take over Fosse's pregame show, engineer a Calero for Pujols trade while Beane is busy trekking through various European soccer venues, resurrect Britney Spears' career, drive the team bus, fly the team plane, tweak Chad Gaudin's mechanics, write the Great American Novel, and open a local hardware store.
I'm not sure what his OPSp would be in that situation, but I think it would solve our lineup problems.
by 74mk on
Nov 10, 2007 9:02 PM PST
up
0 recs
you're good....
by littleA on
Nov 10, 2007 9:24 PM PST
up
0 recs
Who opens local hardware stores anymore?
I won't rule out the rest.
by Cutthemullet on
Nov 12, 2007 3:37 PM PST
up
0 recs
Excellent quibble
My point about Barton would have been unassailable if I had said "regular season" which was what I was referring to but not what I specified. I stand corrected.
However, and this isn't spiteful at all on my part, I do not count the exhibition game HR. Playoff games count, exhibitions don't.
by grover on
Nov 11, 2007 5:28 PM PST
up
0 recs
grover...bravo.
Well done and I loved reading this.
RE Swish playing center...count me as one of the people concerned at the thought of his defense in center. But everyone who is so high on Denorfia...what has he done to earn your confidence in him?
by IM4Oakgal on Nov 10, 2007 9:24 PM PST 0 recs
That did give me a smile.
I am still holding out slight hope that Kotsay will come back to decent form...at the plate and in the field. Even though, I don't like him and I would rather see him traded...and I realize that it won't probably happen.(his returning to form).
by IM4Oakgal on
Nov 10, 2007 10:17 PM PST
up
0 recs
Just to answer this query,
since I seem to be the #1 Denorfia booster in these parts, the things that have impressed me about him are:
- His ability to hit for average. He's consistently posted an OBP well above league average, and most of the projection systems figure him to do so in the bigs as well.
- He's well-rounded; while he's not great in any area, he seems to have no significant weaknesses. It's a little odd to call him a 5-tool player, but a large part of his value comes from the fact that he has at least a modicum of all 5 tools. (Good average, 10-15 HR a year, 15 or so steals, good outfielder and has a strong enough arm to play right field.)
- He's a "gamer." He basically came out of nowhere, having gone to a Division III college, and has improved his game steadily since then.
by PaulThomas on
Nov 11, 2007 10:47 PM PST
up
0 recs
Denorfia was advertised as a
young Kotsay.
I'd prefer the young version.
by A s Eh on
Nov 11, 2007 11:21 PM PST
up
0 recs
kind of the anti-Kotsay...
in his path to the league...Kotsay was a highly touted first round pick out of a major league factory (Fullerton); Denorfia was a 19th rounder out of a school no one's heard of (Wheaton College). But he is from Bristol, CT...maybe Karl Ravech (longest-tenured Bristol-based BBTN guy I could think of) watched him play some high school ball.
PT...I remember when in the late 90's a guy named Gabe Kapler (not to be confused with actor-turned-poker player Gabe Kaplan) emerged out of nowhere to become an even more highly regarded prospect...he too earned the "gamer" label for his (PED-enhanced, I believe) surprising rise to prospectdom. Didn't really materialize in the big leagues.
Those a re just a couple random, frivolous comments...I hope the young Kotsay comparisons regarding his play are accurate, and he can be compared as much to Jack Cust as Mark Kotsay...for being a late bloomer. Do I want at least another Snelling-type option to compete with Kotsay and his younger, road-less-travelled self? Yes. Competition is always good, especially at a position as dubious as CF is right now.
My first choice would still be Swish to CF, Cust to RF, Bonds to DH....
by Cutthemullet on
Nov 12, 2007 3:54 PM PST
up
0 recs
If we're going to sacrifice defense,
I think that's the only way to go. Bonds as the DH would be the only way to come out ahead overall with that atrocious outfield. A regular masher, 120 OPS+, is not going to cut it. We'd need at least a Frank Thomas type of season, somewhere in the range of 140-160 OPS+.
by rebus on
Nov 12, 2007 6:35 PM PST
up
0 recs
You guys probably are too young to remember
Willie Mays in the Mets outfield.
Bonds to DH?
Bonds to DC is probably more like it.
Don't block-out CSPAN if you want to catch the action!
McCovey did it. ...Joined the A's. In a word?
Disappointing
...maybe the WWF thinks Bonds is gate?
by A s Eh on
Nov 12, 2007 10:53 PM PST
up
0 recs
i cannot parse this
by rebus on
Nov 13, 2007 1:29 AM PST
up
0 recs
He thinks Bonds is old and washed-up...
and is citing the late-career downfalls of Mays and McCovey to try to prove his point. Sure, there are examples of guys who ended their careers in the wrong uniforms and on the wrong note...but were any of them as good of a hitter as Barry Bonds? No. Did those guys use HGH (which is a good thing for longevity)? No. Dislike him all you want for personal reasons (he can go to DC and do his best Rafael Palmeiro impression for all I care), but it's going to take a lot more than Willie McCovey's poor showing in Oakland to dissuade me from wanting him to be the key offseason addition. And it's as realistic as A-Rod to the Angels....
by Cutthemullet on
Nov 13, 2007 9:18 PM PST
up
0 recs
At this point the better DH is Cust
...but you are pushing him into RF where he stinks.
Why bring in Mr. Asterisk?
The A's clubhouse will be trashed by Barry's Rx Big Top Karnival & Snake Oil Show.
...and the locker room doesn't have room for two recliners, : )
by A s Eh on
Nov 13, 2007 11:40 PM PST
up
0 recs
Very interesting.
by atomopawn on Nov 10, 2007 9:26 PM PST 0 recs
I'd be willing to look at the major contributors
But I'm not going to comb through and get everybody like I did for Oakland.
by grover on
Nov 11, 2007 5:29 PM PST
up
0 recs
Nice job G
My favorite part of this is the recognition that the A's, as a team, HAVE to play people at positions that stretch them defensively. It's the only way we can afford to have a capable offense.
That means Swisher being open to CF, Cust being open to the possibility of RF.
I think we'll still see Swisher playing some CF. The metrics suggest that he's not as bad as some people on our site think. He also is not a wizard at first, although a lot of ANers clamor to see him there, too. More importantly, playing a guy at first who is capable of playing a major league center field - especially when you have a decent 1b, and no other decent-hitting CFer - is counter-intuitive.
Ditto with Cust in right - he's not as bad as people think, either. Right now, defensive evaluations and metrics focus TOO much attention on range exclusively, which ignores Cust's one asset as a fielder; he DOES have a good arm. Having Cust in right field would not be horrible, given that it upgrades the offense quite a bit.
As for Swisher in center: I don't think he'll complain at all. I think him playing some CF is part of the master plan, and I think it's a small part of why he was given a fair, long contract extension. It's the team saying, "Hey, we need you to flexible, and carry a few gloves around. It might increase your risk of injury slightly, but we're certainly taking care of you. If you got hurt because we've moved you around, at least you weren't on a year-to-year contract. You got your guaranteed 20-plus million."
These scenarios also push Buck to LF, which is very important. Buck's arm is really, really bad. Really bad.
Bonds is really the only high-profile FA that makes sense, if any. If they sign him, Cust will see a lot of time in RF and the offense looks rosier; if they don't sign him, Cust is the full-time DH, which obviously creates a better defensive outfield.
If Cust is in right, he'll probably often get subbed after his 4th AB in the late innings for Kotsay for defensive purposes.
by notsellingjeans on Nov 10, 2007 9:27 PM PST 0 recs
Jeans,,Glad to read your comment
about Cust playing the field. Because I think that would be best. I would still love to see the A's add some pop to the lineup with Bonds or another good bat. So, that would mean Cust playing RF. I am glad to see that someone else thinks it's the better option.



