Orioles Think Tank

It's Been Real, Blogger

2006-03-10T15:55:00.000-05:00

If you managed to get to this site, then you're in the wrong place.

This site has all of my entries from March 9th or earlier.

To get to the new site, CLICK HERE

Loewen Beats USA, Scoffs at Patriot Act

2006-03-09T21:41:00.000-05:00

Orioles farmhand Adam Loewen was the starting pitcher for Team Canada in yesterday's 8-6 upset of Team USA. He threw 3 2/3 shutout innings against what might be one of the most formidable lineups ever assembled. To top it off, his opposing pitcher was NL Cy Young runner-up Dontrelle Willis.

In the bottom of the first inning, he gave up a one out single to Derek Jeter. After walking Ken Griffey Jr. and Derrek Lee, Chipper Jones came up to the plate with the bases loaded and things got interesting. It was less than a year ago that Loewen first pitched against major league hitters during spring training. In case you don't remember, he walked seven batters through one inning and left with an 81.00 ERA. Many even speculated that this exposure led him to lose confidence and struggle through the early part of his season at Frederick. Yesterday, he put all of that behind him. Maintaining his composure, Loewen induced an inning ending double play and, in his words, "set the tone for the next couple of innings".

Here's a few quotes courtesy of Baseball America:

Asked what he knew of the opposing pitcher before the game, ""He's tall,"
[Vernon] Wells said. "He throws a baseball. And he's Canadian."

Said Team USA manager Buck Martinez, "We knew that he had that cutter--he got it in on the hands. He pitched a heck of a game, and he showed a lot of composure for a guy that hasn't pitched above
A-ball."

"What organization is he with?" Jeter asked afterward, betraying his complete ignorance of Adam Loewen to that point. Told Loewen belongs to the Orioles, Jeter's eyes widened. "I'm sure," Jeter said, "I'll be seeing a lot of him."

Here's hoping Derek Jeter is right.

Forecasting- Brian Roberts

2006-03-07T14:00:00.000-05:00

There is no greater cause for optimism, debate, and concern for the 2006 Orioles than Brian Roberts. That's a lot of hats to wear for one little guy.

Baseball America's college 'Freshman of the Year' in 1997 hit his stride in 2005 as few have ever done. Roberts was the best second baseman in baseball and the best player on the Baltimore Orioles. Unfortunately, the year ended with Bubba Crosby nearly ripping his left arm off of his body- an event that could make any sort of prediction for 2006 fruitless. Early word is that Roberts is progressing nicely but may need some time on the DL in April. How inhibited he will be upon his return is anyone's guess. This is likely the first case study of a position player coming back from what we'll label an "arm explosion".

All that said, what I intend to do here is analyze B-Rob's 2005 and it's place in his career path. Trending the data should help determine what aspects are flukey and what improvements were genuine. Moving forward, this should help us figure out what he might do in 2006 (sans the injury). Incorporating the injury into Roberts' forecast is something I, and likely no one, is fully capable of.

Year by Year Data

Age..Year....AB......BA......OBP.....SLG...XBH....BA/BIP
23......2001....273.......253.......284.........341......17...........297
24......2002....128.......227.......308.........297......7...........287
25......2003....460.......270......337..........367......31..........302
26......2004....641........273......344..........376......56.........310
27......2005....561........314.......387..........515.......70.........343

No surprises- Brian Roberts improved across the board in 2005. One thing that is evident is his growing power; as in many cases, his extra base hits increased as he approached his physical peak. One word of caution, however, is that while it looks like 2004's record amount of doubles (for a switch-hitter) were a sign of things to come, they made up over 89% of all his extra base hits. Couple this with the fact that they were in 80 more at at-bats than he had in 2005 and the extent of his power surge begins to look flukey.

His exceedingly high Batting Average on Balls In Play is another cause for concern. Speedy players can have legitimately high BA/BIP's, but the .302 and .310 he posted in 2003 and 2004, respectively, are closer to what we can expect in the future. For the sake of argument, let's recalculate his 2006 batting line, this time assuming a .310 BA/BIP (with equal impact distributed to 1B's, 2B's, and 3B's-- although, at this point, it is inconclusive as to whether or not that is the most effective way of handling BA/BIP) . We are left with the following line:

AB......BA......OBP.....SLG...XBH....BA/BIP
561.......287.......363.......478.....65........310

Certainly that seems more in line with Roberts' career line. Had those been his final numbers, it would have been more difficult to dismiss his gains as anything but legitmate.

With the help of Baseball Graphs, let's take a peak at why anything beyond this batting line may have been flukey. I'm not going to republish Dave Studeman's entire chart but you can follow this link to see the data I am drawing conclusions from in the next section.

Batted Ball Data

The first thing that jumps out at me is Roberts' line drive rate. In 2005, 27% of his batted balls were classified as line drives. Despite the fact that this is not a career high (2003-30%), it should regress towards the four year AL average of 21%.

Roberts made another big jump in the percentage of outfield flies he converted into home runs. After matching his then career norm of 2% in 2004, he made a huge leap to the league average of 11%. That extra oomph he generated was the reason he set a career high in home runs last year. While 11% seems dramatically out of line with his career, let's put it into context. You don't have to scroll down on those charts any further than to Melvin Mora's numbers to see that a sudden jump in HR/OF can be legitimate. Plus, Roberts has clearly entered his physical peak at age 27. And, although I can't scrounge up a link, I remember Peter Gammons reporting that the athlete's training facility in Arizona, that Roberts attends in the offseason, declared him the hardest worker they had ever seen (pre-breakout). Even if I were reluctant to give him full credit for reaching the AL average in HR/OF, it's probably less likely that he would fall all the way back to previous levels.

Finally, let's take a closer look to see if there were obvious hot and/or cold streaks in 2005 that could explain his dramatic rise in production.

Month-by-Month OPS

Apr.- 1.185
May- 1.009
June- .942
July- .705
Aug.- .715
Sep.- .904

Pre All-star break - .345/.416/.591
Post All-star break- .274/.351/.419

It's clear that Roberts' impressive final numbers are in no small part due to a blistering start of the season. I would be reluctant to dismiss it entirely for two reasons: 1) It lasted three months, and 2) even his post ASB numbers are above his career established levels.

Unfortuantely, I would also be reluctant to dismiss the disparity created by these splits. Regardless, the player that Roberts was in the second-half of the season may not be an all-star, but he is an above-average second baseman and a capable leadoff hitter. I have little doubt that at least the post-break gains (as compared to career numbers) will carry forward.

Conclusion

I purposely prefaced this entry with my concerns about his injury because that makes forecasting an already particularly difficult player to forecast nearly impossible. That said, I'll avoid taking the cheap way out and offer my prediction for Brian Roberts in 2006:

124 G...441AB...284 BA...360 OBP...436 SLG... 18/6:SB/CS

While Orioles fans will likely accuse me of being pessimistic with that projection, I should note that I would likely have been more optimistic than other forecasters had the injury not occured. I'll leave you with something positive-- Roberts will likely be in the running for his first Gold Glove now that Orlando Hudson has been shipped to the NL.

The Orioles vs. The AL

2006-03-03T15:12:00.000-05:00

I thought it might be fun to take a look at how the Orioles stacked up to the rest of the American League in 2005 in some key categories. Maybe it will help us see exactly how they fell short and what needs to be addressed in 2006. I'll offer some commentary, but feel free to help me out in the comments section.

OFFENSE

R/G: Bal- 4.5/AL- 4.76

Boy, that's ugly. Only four teams in the AL scored less runs per game than the Orioles (and none from the AL East): Minnesota, Kansas City, Detroit, and Seattle. Minnesota has a top-line pitching staff, Seattle plays in a notorious pitchers park, we barely edged Detroit (4.46 R/G), and Kansas City... well, there's something wrong if you take solace in that.

So, exactly what components of run production did the Orioles fall short in?

BA: Bal- .269/AL- .268

The O's were able to keep up with the league's pace in batting average. Unfortunately, batting average has little correlation with scoring runs. In broad terms, BA's value is essentially limited to its impact on OBP.

OBP: Bal- .327/ AL- .333

I have to admit, this isn't as bad as I expected. Still, the Orioles had the lowest OBP of any team in the AL East and trailed New York (.355) and Boston (.357) by thirty points. In fact, those two teams led the entire AL in OBP (and R/G... if you catch my drift).

SLG: Bal- .434/ AL- .424

There we go. Let's just hope those ten points weren't propped up by B-12.

P/PA (Pitches per plate appearance): Bal- 3.65/ AL- 3.74

Only Tampa Bay saw fewer pitches per plate appearance than the Orioles in the AL. The average AL team had 38.3 PA's per game, the Orioles- 37.9. With some pretty easy math, it becomes apparent that opposing pitchers were able to throw about 5 less pitches per game against the Orioles than the average AL team; and 844 fewer pitches on the season.

Often times, people can see the value of taking pitches for the intrinsic value of a base on balls. Here, we see an example of a team that hurt itself by not taking pitches and allowing opposing starters to pitch deeper into games.

GB/FB: Bal- 1.17/AL- 1.26

This certainly helps explain the O's above-average SLG %. After all, it's pretty difficult to round the bases when you're hitting wormburners like Hideki Matsui circa 2003.

Defense/ Pitching

DER (Defense Efficiency Rating): Bal- .693/AL- .696

Right around league-average. (DER is the rate at which a defense converts balls in play into outs. Its reciprocal is the pitching staff's BA/BIP)

RA/9: Bal- 5.05/AL- 4.74; ERA: Bal- 4.57/AL- 4.35; DIPS 3.0: Bal- 4.75/AL- 4.73

What's interesting here is that although the Orioles trailed well behind the rest of the AL is traditional measures like RA/9 and ERA, they were roughly league average according to the superior measure of performance- DIPS 3.0.

Why is that?

LD%: Bal- 20%/AL- 19.6%; HR/FB: Bal- 13%/AL- 12%

As I've explained before, both of these measures are highly influenced by luck. In neither category were the O's well above the league average (ie unlucky), but the combined effects of the two certainly help explain the difference between traditional measures of the pitching staff's performance and the more accurate DIPS 3.0.

K/9: Bal- 6.4/AL- 6.1; BB/9: Bal- 3.6/ AL- 3.0

No surprises here. The Orioles tied the White Sox for third in the AL in K rate. Unfortunately, they also finished just behind Tampa Bay for highest BB rate. Daniel Cabrera was a key contributor in both categories, and helps demonstrate both the potential and the volatility of the Oriole's pitching staff.

GB/FB: Bal- 1.37/AL- 1.25

This is certainly promising. Again Daniel Cabrera (1.78) was a key contributor; as were Todd Williams (3.59), Steve Kline (1.96), and Sidney Ponson (1.93). You can probably tell from the latter two examples that inducing ground balls is not enough on its own to effectively retire major league hitters.

Conclusion

There's certainly a lot here to mull over, but there are two things that jump out to me.

Offensively, the Orioles have to make pitchers work harder this year. 5 pitches per game may not seem like a lot, but that is essentially one and a half extra plate appearances per game that opposing pitchers are getting through with only their typical exertion.

On the other side of the ball, it's no secret that Orioles pitchers have got to cut down on the walks. Still, what surprised me was how average the team was by DIPS 3.0 standards, even when other measures say otherwise. I'd expect an overall improvement in the rotation just from the expulsion of Sidney Ponson (which should outweigh the loss of B.J. Ryan- in more ways than one). But, now we can now expect those improvements over a baseline that is roughly league-average, as opposed to merely expecting improvements from a below-average staff.

Grab Bag

2006-03-01T20:52:00.000-05:00

Interesting tidbits in this piece. We'll have to wait until inter-league play to see if he can hit the Warehouse again.

I also found this nugget in Buster Olney's blog: Talked to some evaluators this spring who agree that Lopez at first will turn into Mike Piazza II: He just doesn't have the feet to play the position. We'll see.

Will Carroll's Spring Training Updates are always a source of discussion-- just ask Jim Hendry and the Chi-town media. From Orioles camp, he reports: Brian Roberts is making good progress, but is still a question mark for Opening Day. He should begin hitting soon which is the big test... Early word from Orioles insiders is that Leo Mazzone is seeing who’s willing to listen, learn, and survive. His early workouts have been, according to one source, “harder than anything I’ve seen here. The pitchers are buckling under it.” Watch to see who comes out better and if any break under the “throw more” plan of Mazzone.

The local scribes love Melvin Mora. And who wouldn't love a guy with 14 kids? I found this quote from Melmo over at AaronGleeman.com: "[Tony Batista] is a guy you want to have on your team," Orioles All-Star third baseman Melvin Mora said in a telephone interview. "This is a guy who is always talking about Jesus. All of the people are going to love him in Minnesota." And all this time I assumed Batista's ridiculous batting stance was an effort to face Mecca. At least we finally get an explanation for this feud (scroll down to Another BP Scuffle)-- apparently Ron Villone hates Jesus.

Spencer Fordin had a nice little mailbag over at the official Orioles website. The only nitpicking I have to do is over this quote: "...Lopez and Benson. Neither is a classic ace, but both have proven to be league-average pitchers over the past few years, and Benson gives the impression that he hasn't even scratched the surface yet" If Kris Benson has a breakout season at age 31, after posting a career-low 4.9 K/9, I will eat my hat. Still, a solid MLB.com writer- not all teams have them.

Most sportsbooks have the O's at about 74.5 wins on the over/under. That total seems about right to me- for Vegas, anyhow. The Orioles will play 57 games against the competitive Yankees, Red Sox, and Blue Jays. Still, I would have no problem betting that over. I'm going to post specific predictions later, but I think there is a decent chance that the O's snap their losing seasons streak this year. And yes, I will be picking them for fourth place.

Ted Cook has an article up about line-up optimization over at Orioles Hangout. It's a good read and makes a nice companion piece to this fine piece of literature.

This whole Zack Greinke situation must be leaving conspiracy theorists in need of a new pair of pants. I know I can't get enough of it. As to what is actually going on at this point, your guess is as good as mine. Personally, I'm just hoping everything works out. Greinke is one of the most fun-to-watch pitchers to come along in a long time and I'd hate to lose my last reason to ever watch the Royals.

If you haven't gotten a chance to check out the Baseball America top 100 prospect list yet, do so now. Nick Markakis comes in at #21, Adam Loewen at #45, Hayden Penn at #81, and Nolan Reimold at #99. Only five organizations have more than four prospects on that list, and I have to imagine that Chris Ray (who was eligible for it), Brandon Snyder, and Garrett Olson garnered some consideration.

A Surprisingly Optimistic Off-Season Recap

2006-02-27T16:07:00.000-05:00

The Hardball Times recently published an article by Ben Jacobs that began a series recapping and ranking the off-season (mis)adventures of every major league team. He started with the bottom third of his rankings and, surprise, the Orioles check in at #23. Below is his take on what the black and orange brass accomplished this off-season:

The first problem for the Orioles is that they lost their best reliever
when B.J. Ryan signed with the Blue Jays. Baltimore had a below average 4.10 ERA from its bullpen last year, and losing Ryan's 2.43 ERA in 70-plus innings won't help that.

The next problem is that the free agent signings were not good. Giving Jeff Conine $1.7 million wasn't a stroke of genius, but it wasn't terrible either because although he's 39 years old, he's been at least an average hitter for the last seven seasons. He can certainly be useful.

The same probably can't be said for Kevin Millar. He's 34 years old and he's coming off the worst offensive season of his career. I know he's got a good reputation in the clubhouse, but he doesn't hit well enough for first base and he's not a great defender to make up for that. If he's just a pinch-hitter/backup/fourth outfielder, that's OK, but he figures to get a lot of time at first this year.

The big free agent signing for Baltimore was $27.5 million over four years for Ramon Hernandez. That's a fine deal for a catcher of his ability, as he's been a solid hitter the last three years at a position that's low on solid hitters. The problem is that they already paid the catcher premium for Javy Lopez. Now they're going to be paying a lot of money every day for either a backup catcher or a subpar DH, since neither of them is likely to put up an OPS+ above 110 or so (if even that high).

The trades for LaTroy Hawkins and Corey Patterson are both low risk, since the Orioles didn't give up much (Steve Kline for Hawkins and Nate Spears and Carlos Perez for Patterson), but they're also low reward, since neither Hawkins nor Patterson are actually any good. At least Hawkins has had a three-year stretch in which he was a good pitcher, but he wasn't even close to that level last year.

The other piece to the offseason (trading Jorge Julio and John Maine for Kris Benson) is a solid deal because Benson can give the Orioles a lot of decent innings, while Julio is maddeningly inconsistent and Maine hasn't been able to live up to the potential he showed a couple years ago.

But really, the only thing I could get excited about were I an Orioles fan would be the signing of Leo Mazzone as pitching coach, but I don't think even the great Leo can make the Orioles (who were 10th with a 4.56 ERA last year) a top five pitching team with the talent they have. The best they can probably hope for is middle of the pack pitching-wise.

Despite spending the increasingly disturbing amount of time necessary to maintain an Orioles website, I’m not often accused of being an Orioles apologist. But I do take exception to this particular interpretation of the Orioles’ off-season moves. I’m a long-time reader of THT and am familiar with a lot of the quality writing that Jacobs has done in the past, so I don’t mean this as an indictment of either, but let’s review each of his points. You’re free to decide the merits of both arguments.

First, it’s no secret that losing B.J. Ryan to free agency is going to hurt our bullpen, but to count losing him as a strike against the Orioles' off-season seems harsh. In fact, I’d take the opposite approach. Had the Orioles been able to hang onto Ryan for anywhere near his final signing price in Toronto, they’d be committing roughly 1/6th of their total team payroll to a pitcher that would be counted on for 70 or so innings a year. The point is not that Ryan isn’t worth that kind of money- although, as an aside, he isn’t- it’s that the Orioles are not within the stone’s throw of contention that is the only logical catalyst for paying exorbitant amounts for an elite 70 inning pitcher. Not signing him actually leaves open the payroll flexibility to pick up the bigger pieces needed to take steps forward in 2007 and beyond. This is without even mentioning the inherent danger of citing ERA as an indicator of bullpen effectiveness.

In addition, the Orioles have hedged their bets with a series of smaller moves that should provide the bullpen with decent depth- again, without decreasing future payroll flexibility. I’m not implying that the 2006 pen is going to look anything like some recent Twins or Angels bullpens, but the likes of Chris Ray, LaTroy Hawkins, Todd Williams, as well as the depth provided by NRI's like Sendy Rleal, Jim Brower, Franklyn Gracesqui, Orber Moreno, Ricky Bottalico, Scott Rice and others should be enough to keep it from standing out as the weak link on a decidedly average ballclub.

Jacobs’ next two points are more related than you might think. He is basically arguing that the two over-the-hill one-year-rentals are, at best, useful. No argument there. I would nitpick at his seemingly reversed optimism about Conine and pessimism about Millar, though. As is evidenced by the projection chart in my last post, so would Marcel, DiPS, and PECOTA. Either way, these one year contracts are a great way to bridge to the seasons beyond 2006 without compromising the development of some of the Orioles more exciting prospects. I’d sure rather watch Jeff Conine slug .380 in the major leagues than a not-yet-ready Nick Markakis, and that could very well be the situation that the Orioles are protecting against. Again, what these moves come down to are trying to put together a .500 team en route to competing in 2007 and beyond.

One more point, and Jacobs could not have known this in time for his article, but the minor league contract recently given to Richard Hidalgo only makes these signings more redundant. Of course, I’ve already made my opinions known about this.

Next up is the Ramon Hernandez signing. Again, I see the argument popping up that it’s a redundant signing. Fair enough, but Javy Lopez is a poor defensive catcher who is 35 and getting increasingly fragile behind the plate. I have my own reservations about the signing, but minimizing Javy’s value to the Orioles in 2006 is not chief among them. I understand that a startlingly lucrative buyer’s market has made this nearly impossible, but I can’t help shaking the feeling that the O’s could get something useful from the new Dodger regime in exchange for Lopez. That would at least void some of the criticism of this deal. After that, all we'd have to worry about is the decreasingly effective 1400 or so plate appearances we can expect out of Hernandez over the next four years.

Jacobs’ final points are not really knocking the Orioles that much. I agree that Corey Patterson is far from a good player at this point. But, however unrealized it may be, Patterson still has enough of an upside as a 26 year old to make trading two A-ball prospects for him a worthwhile gamble for a non-contender. And it’s not like forcing Luis Matos to his natural position as a 4th OF’er is going to have massive repercussions for future Oriole teams.

Concerning the Benson trade, Jacobs acknowledges that there’s little not to like. It won’t have the impact in the win column that signing A.J. Burnett would have, but it’s not going to hamper the Orioles’ chance to contend in the future nearly as much if he implodes, either.

Finally, this snippet ends on an obviously positive note- Leo Mazzone. Last year, the Orioles were 5.3% below average in the AL in run prevention and 5.6% below average in run production. While this couldn’t have been said of the aging core of the 2005 offense, the pitching staff will likely improve merely by being another year older. Adding Mazzone to further help out the development of pitchers like Daniel Cabrera, Erik Bedard, and Chris Ray should be enough on its own to make the Orioles worth watching in 2006.

In conclusion, let’s just say the O’s went wild and signed both Burnett and Konerko this off-season. That probably adds about 6-7 wins to the current roster and, albeit by a much closer margin, results in another fourth place finish in the very tough AL East. The Orioles need fundamental changes in their team construction and, at this point, a high-priced free agent or two is not going to push them over the top. Despite the Hernandez signing and the Konerko offer, Flanagan has seemingly started the process of building fom within towards contention. By not overpaying for a decidedly mediocre free agent pool and blocking several of the more promising young players in the organization, the Orioles should be in a better spot to see who shakes out in 2006 and build around a promising core next off-season. From there, of course, the Orioles will again have to decide just how close they are to contending and spend accordingly. If nothing else I’m saying leaves you impressed with the 2005-06 off-season, you better believe that it has left the Orioles with enough roster and payroll flexibility to build a contender in the near future. Making the right signings might be the tricky part, but not making the wrong signings is an important, if often overlooked, first step.

If I’m placing a bet, I expect the O’s to rank a lot better than 23rd on lists like these after next off-season.

2006 Hitter Projections

2006-02-24T17:59:00.000-05:00

Above, you will find a chart that has projections for 13 Orioles hitters that are pretty good bets to make the team out of Spring Training. I apologize if it's a bit tough on the eyes, but this is about as good as I could do on Blogger (EDIT: Just click on the chart and it's fine). If you'd like a clearer copy of the chart, email me and I'll send it to you.

Marcel is the brain-child of Tom Tango, ZiPS is the fine forecasting system orginated by Dan Szymborski, and PECOTA is the culmination of some of Nate Silver's more intriguing work.

Note that playing time is a reflection of past playing time and age and that none of these systems is opinionated as to whether, say, Corey Patterson or Luis Matos should start in CF, or how fast Brian Roberts' elbow is going to heal.

Ramon Hernandez

All three projections are pretty similar and completely reasonable. Note that all three have him playing less than a full season. But then, we already had a good idea that was going to happen- right?

Javy Lopez

He's a pretty good bet for iso. disc. of about .50, so his OBP is going to be awfully dependant on his BA. PECOTA sees his power numbers continuing to dip and I am inclined to agree. 35 year old catchers, as a rule, decline.

Kevin Millar

ZiPS sees 2005 as a sign of what's to come. Marcel and PECOTA both see a consolidation year between his above-average past and last season. He's a good bet to straddle the line between useful and Sean Burroughs.

Brian Roberts

None of the forecasting systems are projecting Roberts to keep up his stellar 2005 performance but none of them are expecting him to give back all of his gains, either. If he can keep his OBP in the .360 range and continue to play solid defense, he'll still be one of the better bets at 2B next year. His power numbers will determine whether or not he ever sees another all-star game and a ~.425 SLG looks about right to me. I'm hoping we get some word about that elbow soon. The Todd Walker rumors floating out there are less than an encouraging sign.

Miguel Tejada

Miggy being Miggy, I guess. The only surprise is that Marcel sees a decline in playing time. I don't buy it. Miguel will continue doing what he does, 162 games a year. By July, we should know for whom.

Melvin Mora

The thing that worried me most about Mora's 2005 performance was not the drop in power numbers or the drop in his contact rate. What worried me was the decline in his walk rate. It could mean so many different things. He may have changed his approach to compensate for declining performance, he could be listening too intently to Terry Crowley, or it could be a harbinger of things to come for a player that some feel is likely to decline nearly as fast as he ascended. I'd be happy if he met the projections above.

Jeff Conine

ZiPS sees him as useless and PECOTA and Marcel prefer the phrase "somewhat useful". All three focus on his age more than the fact that he is leaving a notorious pitcher's park. I'm inclined to agree.

Corey Patterson

Again, the systems are pretty consistent- even if Patterson is anything but. They see him meeting somewhere in the middle of his 2004 and 2005 seasons.

Luis Matos

To be honest, his projected lines are more useful than Patterson's. But, if these projections come true, we will be counting the days 'til the Nick Markakis Era arrives.

Jay Gibbons

Projected to be our most useful Opening Day outfielder, but look at the competition. None of the systems expect him to earn that new raise.

I also found a nifty little tool c/o The Hardball Times. Using a pretty simple algorythm, it utilizes Marcel and ZiPS projections to determine optimal lineups for 2006.

Marcel

Roberts
Millar
Mora
Lopez
Tejada
Gibbons
Hernandez
Patterson (Matos would bat 9th, after Conine)
Conine

ZiPS

Roberts
Mora
Tejada
Lopez
Gibbons
Hernandez
Patterson/Matos
Millar
Conine

Go ahead, follow the link and substitute who you want in there. I'm sure the two line-ups it projected above should at least inspire some debate.

Also, both system's give the O's credit for 5.7 runs per game with those lineups. That would come to 923 runs on the season- which would have led the AL by 20 runs in 2005. Of course, this is assuming 162 games each out of Tejada, Lopez, Mora, Roberts, and Hernandez-- so I'm betting the under.

Quickies

2006-02-22T19:05:00.000-05:00

In my last post, I detailed David Gassko's DIPS 3.0. I downloaded the spreadsheet at the bottom of his article and added a few columns into it. First I imported RA/9 for all the pitchers and then I entered a column that calculates the difference between a pitcher's DIPS 3.0 and RA/9. The greater the number in the Difference column, the more that pitcher's results exceeded his performance ($38 million for Jarrod Washburn, anyone?). The greater the number is negative, the more that pitcher's results failed to live up to his actual performance. It's a handy way to look at which pitchers got ripped off the most and vice versa. Feel free to download it here (EDIT: The download wasn't working earlier, but it should be fine now). There are all sorts of fun ways to play around with this if you're handy with Excel. And again, thanks to David for the great work and for allowing me to distribute this.

Melvin Mora wants to stay in Baltimore. This is the type of story that makes it tough to be both objective and a fan. On the one hand, I think that Melvin is a throwback to the kind of classy player that used to epitomize the Orioles organization. He's always smiling and has been my favorite Oriole to watch since 2003. And it's always fun to root for a player that seemingly came out of nowhere (think David Newhan circa 2004). On the other hand, the types of numbers that have been getting thrown out are around 3 years and $24 million and frankly, I doubt that Mora will be an effective major leaguer in 2009. PECOTA has the chances of him being completely out of baseball at 5%, 14%, and 30% for the years 2007-2009 and, although it wouldn't factor into this contract, 52% for 2010. From 2006 to 2009, PECOTA also projects his plate appearances dropping from 613 to 464. Since I have been preaching a "build towards 2008" approach, it would make little sense to keep $8 million on the payroll for decreasing production when it is likely the Orioles could get a nice prospect or two for him in July.

I ran into this nice little puff piece about Javy Lopez. This time, Javy really wants to end his career in Baltimore and is more worried about getting an extension than anything else. To his credit, I should mention that by all accounts, he is spending a lot of time training hard for two positions this spring.

Scroll down in this article, and you'll see that Luis Matos is taking the opportunity to represent Puerto Rico in the WBC. I certainly can't blame him, but I doubt this bodes well for what seemed like an open competetion in CF with Corey Patterson.

It looks like one of my favorites, Aaron Rakers, is on the shelf for 2006. He has a torn labrum and the chances that we will ever see how his outstanding minor league numbers translate to a full-time role in the major leagues have grown pretty slim. I haven't been this disappointed since I snuck onto my friend's instant messenger screen name and asked his girlfriend to rate me on a scale of 1 to 10.

An anonymous commenter pointed something out to me that I have been meaning to mention. Ted Cook is doing a series of Ground Ball Effects articles over at Orioles Hangout. I've conversed with Ted a few times and, as if you couldn't tell from the articles, he knows his stuff. Luckily for us, this isn't one of the things that OH charges for, although it is defintely some of their best stuff. I urge you to check out Part 1 and Part 2. Read in conjunction with the several DIPS related materials I've linked to in the past, it makes a nice primer for understanding the often misunderstood art of inducing ground balls.

As the season approaches, I will be making an effort to update this blog more regularly. I am pleased with the way this site is growing, and I thank all of you that keep checking back. I look forward to blogging my first season of Orioles baseball in 2006.

DIPS 3.0

2006-02-20T14:15:00.000-05:00

A couple of days ago, David Gassko (of the Statistically Speaking Blog) published his second article on DIPS 3.0 over at The Hardball Times. Like the original work by Voros McCracken, it's relatively simple, straight-forward, and incredibly meaningful. These guys have a real knack for making me feel stupid for not thinking of things first.

Years back, McCracken discovered that replacing a pitcher's BABIP with the league average BABIP and recalculating his ERA based on this was a better indicator of future ERA's than current ERA. If I lost you in that last sentence, he's essentially saying that pitchers have, at a minimum, much less control over whether or not a ball in play becomes a hit than previously believed.

David Gassko decided to take this one step further. We already know that pitchers generally have consistent GB and FB rates, and you might as well lob K's, BB's, HBP's, and infield flies onto that pile. HR's are an interesting case and they are accounted for as a reflection of ((League Ave. LD rate*(Leag. Ave. HR/LD))+ ((FB rate*(Leag. Ave. FB HR/FB)). What does not correlate year to year is the amount of line drives a pitcher allows (as is reflected in Gassko's HR calculations). So, with some surprisingly simple math, Gassko replaces the line drive rate with the league average and then assigns singles, doubles, etc. according to league average distributions (for instance, a line drive becomes an out 29.3% of the time). Another thing that becomes apparent is that it is silly to differentiate between earned and unearned runs at this point. After all, you're already separating the pitcher from his defense. This was originally a problem because ground balls more often result in an error, so GB pitchers' ERA more often overrates their effectiveness.

After normalizing line drives and then redistributing all the other outcomes, you're left with a number that is a more accurate reflection of performance than ERA, DIPS ERA, and FIP-- DIPS 3.0. Without further ado, your 2005 Orioles:

DIPS 3.0 ... RA/9 ... Diff.

BJ Ryan ... 2.92 ... 2.56 ... +0.36

Chris Ray ... 3.90 ... 3.32 ... +0.58

Aaron Rakers ... 4.18 ... 3.29 ... +0.89

Erik Bedard ... 4.36 ... 4.19 ... +0.17

John Parrish ... 4.47 ... 3.12 ... +1.35

Daniel Cabrera ... 4.57 ... 5.13 ... -0.56

Jorge Julio ... 4.59 ... 6.28 ... -1.69

Tim Byrdak ... 4.61 ... 4.78 ... -0.17

Todd Williams... 4.69 ... 4.01 ... +0.68

Bruce Chen ... 4.71 ... 4.29 ... +0.42

Jason Grimsley ... 4.96 ... 6.14 ... -1.18

Steve Kline ... 5.06 ... 5.02 ... +0.04

Rodrigo Lopez ... 5.08 ... 5.42 ... -0.34

Rick Bauer ... 5.12 ... 9.72 ... -4.60

Sidney Ponson ... 5.17 ... 6.70 ... -1.53

James Baldwin ... 5.24 ... 4.47 ... +0.76

John Maine ... 5.40 ... 6.75 ... -1.35

Hayden Penn ... 5.56 ... 7.09 ... -1.53

Steve Reed ... 5.60 ... 6.61 ... -1.01

Eric DuBose ... 6.21 ... 6.44 ... -0.23

You can see the results for yourself-- Sidney and Jorge weren't quite that bad, BJ and Chris Ray weren't quite that good, and so on.

One caveat: This is highly dependant on the subjective art of scorekeeping. At some point, this will have to be addressed and quantified-- as far as this can be done. I don't think this is enough to negate the meaning of the numbers above, but quite frankly, I have little clue as to the variance in the classification of GB's, FB's, and line drives among different scorekeepers.

All in all, I think this is some fascinating work. McCracken taught us that pitchers have less control over balls in play than previously thought. And, as Gassko tells us in his article, his research shows us why.

The Battle for CF

2006-02-16T12:45:00.000-05:00

Intro/Background

Luis Matos came out of the gates raking in 2003. It wasn't long until he forced the Orioles to promote him from Ottawa. He shined in his 103 game trial to the tune of a .303/.361/.467 batting line. Coming in to 2004, the Orioles pinned their hopes not only on the free agent signings of Miguel Tejada, Rafael Palmeiro, and Javy Lopez, but also on the continued development of Matos and fellow OF's Larry Bigbie and Jay Gibbons. While Tejada and Lopez shined, Matos was by far the biggest disappointment of a largely disappointing group. His .224/.275/.333 batting line was something even Cristian Guzman would be ashamed of. He ended his season by breaking his shin and having to get a metal rod surgically inserted to stabilize the bone. 2005 essentially split the difference between his 2003 and 2004 seasons. He posted a .280/.340/.373 batting line while making it through a career-high 112 games. Unfortunately, concerns about his work ethic and injury-prone nature grew from a whisper to a persistent rumor and finally climaxed with a trade for one-time top prospect, Corey Patterson.

Patterson, much like Matos, has had many ups and downs in his young career. Baseball America named him the #3 prospect in all of baseball in 2000 and then ranked him #2 in 2001. Taking a cue from all the buzz that Patterson was generating, the Cubs rushed him through the minor leagues. He had brief stints with the parent club in 2000 and 2001 (his age 20 and 21 seasons, respectively) where he looked overmatched at the plate. The full-time gig was his by 2002 and he responded by posting a .253/.284/.392 batting line. Although he was still not ready for the show, he showed enough glimpses of what he could become that the Cubs would not send him back to the minors until 2005. Since 2002, he posted the following batting lines:

2003 (329 ABs)- .298/.329/.511
2004 (631 ABs)- .266/.320/.452
2005 (451 ABs)- .215/.254/.348

Just a cursory glance at those lines will tell you exactly why the Cubs were so willing to part with him this off-season. While still only entering his age 26 season, it only took Patterson one year to convince Jim Hendry that two C-level A-ball prospects had more potential value than the former #2 prospect in all of baseball.

Basic Info, Splits

Matos- DOB: 10/30/78; T-R, B-R
Patterson- DOB: 8/13/79; T-R, B-L

In 2005, Matos hit lefties very well-- .297/.368/.466. Even with that performance, however, he has shown a reverse platoon split for his career, hitting lefties to the tune of a .227/.285/.343 batting line.

Over Patterson's career, he has only authored a reverse platoon split once- in 2004. Still, his career batting line against righties (.259/.302/.426) is not egregiously out of line with his career numbers against lefties (.233/.266/.378).

Defense

Both Matos and Patterson are regarded as slightly above-average center-fielders. Over his career, Matos has posted a Rate2 of 103- or three runs above average per 100 games. Patterson has a career Rate2 of 97, but that is heavily weighed down by his time growing into the position in his earlier seasons. In 2004 and 2005, he posted Rate2's of 102 and 101, respectively.

Flaws

I detailed many of the concerns about each player in the intro, but I'll reiterate them here. Matos showed the Orioles that he was little more than 4th OF in 2005. He ranked 31st out of CF with at least 300 PA's in secondary average, and his glove can only make up so much ground. He will always have a spot on someone's bench due to his above-average speed (although he has poor base-stealing technique) and ability to provide late-inning insurance defensively.

Anytime someone has a 1:5 career BB/K ratio, like Patterson does, their flaw is easy to pick out. In and of themselves, strikeouts are generally over-emphasized. A player like Manny Ramirez has lots of K's, but all that indicates is that he likes to work deep into counts. However, when a player fails to post a corresponding number of walks, then they have contact/strike-zone issues. Corey Patterson was never forced to confront these flaws in Chicago and it would be a mistake to assume he will overcome them on his own- especially if the make-up issues that dogged him in 2005 prove warranted. Nobody has ever doubted his speed (and he is a very good base-stealer), arm, power, or defense.

Conclusion

It is possible that the Orioles enter 2006 with a platoon situation in CF. Unfortunately, that would be counting on Luis Matos to continue the work he did in 2005 against left-handers- which, at this point, looks like the outlier in his career splits. It would also be ignoring the fact that in the short term that Patterson was able to hit righties well, he was also able to hit lefties at a better clip than we could hope from Matos.

What this position battle boils down to, then, is what direction Patterson's career takes. Simply put, he is holding all the cards. If he comes close to his 2003/2004 form, Matos will be relegated to 4th OF status. Matos may be the safer bet at this point but he can not match Patterson's upside. What Matos does provide is a nice security blanket in case Patterson continues to struggle like he did in 2005. Believe me, the Orioles front office want Patterson to win this job. If he doesn't, it will be because he failed to measure up to a decidedly below-average ballplayer, not because Matos is playing like it's 2003 all over again.

Free Agent Watch: Richard Hidalgo

2006-02-13T13:24:00.000-05:00

With only a short time until pitchers and catchers report, I thought I'd address the Richard Hidalgo rumor going around. Now- I have no idea as to it's validity, but that will not be the focus here. I'm going to take a look at the player- where he's been and where he might be headed.

Most of you know the name- Richard Hidalgo- as a function of his 2000 and 2003 seasons with the Houston Astros. In those years he hit .314/.391/.636 and .309/.385/.572 respectively. Before those seasons, he posted a season and change that looked pretty good and a horrible one. In between those years, he posted a solid season and a horrible one. Since those seasons, he's posted two horrible seasons. Last year, he basically hit like Sammy Sosa v.2K5 - even in the Arlington bandbox. You see what I'm getting at-- Hidalgo is one of the most remarkably inconsistent players in baseball.

A telling indicator of his inconsistency is his isolated discpline (OBP-BA). Have a look.

1997- 0.52
1998- 0.52
1999- 1.01
2000- 0.77
2001- 0.81
2002- 0.84
2003- 0.76
2004- 0.64
2005- 0.69

There are a few trends worth noting here. First, like many eventual all-stars, Hidalgo gradually improved his plate discipline before it declined and settled into the realm of decidedly average. Second, Hidalgo's best seasons do not correlate at all with his most disciplined seasons. For instance, his 1999 and 2002 seasons were nothing short of terrible. Yet, those are the seasons he posted his highest iso. discipline. I don't need to reiterate the high correlation between getting on base in any form and scoring runs, but there are exceptions out there that are more valuable offensively when they are more aggressive at the plate.

If I am venturing a hypothesis here, it is that Hidalgo is the type of hitter that thrives on being aggressive at the plate. Without having anything in front of me to quantitatively support this claim, that style of hitting lends itself to athletic (or toolsy) types- which scouts will confirm that Hidalgo is amongst. Of course, the downfall of this style of hitting is that it isn't often sustainable beyond a player's physical peak. In this example, you'll notice that Hidalgo will turn 31 in July. Moreover, his stolen base totals (another indicator of athleticism) have declined to a career-low of 1 in 2005 after a peak of 13 in 2000. All this leads me to the conclusion that Hidalgo spent his formative years altering his batting style, trying to figure out what worked for him. In the years he was able to most effectively determine his optimal plate aggressiveness, he was an all-star caliber player. But, since the approach he settled on is more reliant than others on sheer athleticism, he has had trouble maintaining success as he's aged. Accordingly, I find him to be an unlikely candidate for a rebound season.

Defensively, Hidalgo has played all three spots in the outfield adequately. He's even had a few outstanding seasons in right field where his arm strength is most valuable.

And just so I mention it, Hidalgo has no particular platoon advantages. He bats right-handed but has posted similar .276/.357/.480 and .266/.341/.493 lines vs. lefties and righties, respectively, over his career. In 2005, he even showed a reverse platoon advantage.

Disclaimer: For this particular example, I've only loosely relied on scouting reports. Most of my conclusions are based on analyzing his career major league statistics.

In other news, The New York Post has named Javy Lopez one of the 5 most likely players to be traded, either in Spring Training or during the season. I'm constantly surprised by the lack of respect Javy gets. His career places him squarely in the Hall of Very Good. Of course, I'd still like to see him moved for whatever young talent the O's can get.

If you're a premium member at Baseball Prospectus (and you should be), I urge you to check out their Team Health Report on the Orioles. Pretty much the usual suspects, but my earlier pessimism about the Ramon Hernandez signing has not been alleviated.

John Sickels Top 20

2006-02-11T21:54:00.000-05:00

Since we were lucky enough to have Deric McKamey offer some extended commentary in our last post, I thought it might make sense to look at what another popular analyst, John Sickels, has to say about the Orioles minor league system as well. Below you'll find his top 20 list, graded out. You'll have to check out his site for the more in-depth version. And I urge you to check out his book for an even more in-depth analysis, complete with an explanation as to what each grade means.

Nick Markakis, OF, Grade A-
Brandon Snyder, C, B+
Chris Ray, RHP, B+
Adam Loewen, LHP, B
Val Majewski, OF, B
Nolan Reimold, OF, B
Garrett Olson, LHP, B
J.J. Johnson, RHP, B
Brandon Erbe, RHP, B
Hayden Penn, RHP, B-
Jeff Fiorentino, OF, B-
Chris Britton, RHP, B-
Radhames Liz, RHP, B-
Dave Haehnel, LHP, C+
Kurt Birkins, LHP, C
Brian Finch, RHP, C
Ryan Keefer, RHP, C
Blake Owen, RHP, C
Paco Figueroa, 2B, C
Wilfredo Perez, LHP, C (reportedly will miss '06 due to Tommy John surgery)

Some things worth noting:

Unlike Deric, you'll notice that John is higher on Adam Loewen than Hayden Penn. Without giving away too much of his premium (read: you have to pay for it) information, it looks like John is adding onto the pile of people that think Penn would benefit from some time in Ottawa.
Most minor league pundits have had no problem vaulting Nolan Reimold, Garrett Olson, and, in some cases, even Brandon Erbe past Brandon Snyder on their lists despite Snyder's status as the #1 pick in last year's draft. In no instances has anyone implied this to be an indictment of Snyder, but rather a reflection that the Orioles got some top-shelf talent down into the third round. Sickels, however, remains very high on Snyder. Also note that in a previous post, I mentioned that Sickels has said that Reimold would have ranked #51 on his top hitters list (but it only goes up to 50).
I was surprised to see Sendy Rleal left off the list. Sickels seems more inclined to side with younger live arms that may have a higher ceiling than above-average reliever. But who are you going to side with- some schmuck that knows how to use blogger or someone that has worked with Bill James?
Right now, Haehnel is graded as a C+. Last year, he was rated a C. He is definitely one that will be interesting to watch as he gets his first crack at AA next year, especially if Deric McKamey's optimism proves warranted.

Interview: Deric McKamey

2006-02-09T00:08:00.000-05:00

Deric McKamey has been Baseball HQ’s Director of Minor League Analysis for 12 years. Since 2001, he has been a contributor to Street & Smith’s Baseball magazine. He was also part of the 2002 class at the Major League Scouting Bureau’s Scout Development Program and has worked as an advisor to the St. Louis Cardinals since 2004. What brings him here today is that I was fortunate enough to purchase his recently released 2006 Minor League Baseball Analyst; a collection of essays, scouting reports, and prospect lists that has quickly vaulted to the top of my never ending pile of baseball annuals. Graciously, Deric agreed to field the following questions about the Orioles minor league system. If you like what you see here, I'd encourage you to check out some of his other work linked above.

OTT- Can you briefly tell us how you are able to combine statistical analysis and traditional scouting methods and what makes this so important when evaluating minor league talent?

DM- I believe one should use all available information in evaluating prospects, but it’s important to discern what you see on the field and on the stat page. After I’ve evaluated a player in a game, I always scrutinize his statistics to see if things match-up. When they do, you feel pretty confident that your assessment is correct. The problem lies when the tools and stats don’t fit, which at that point, you have to make the call which to rely on more. It isn’t always just the tools or just the stats in those instances, but you have to judge each player individually.

OTT- The crown jewel of the Orioles minor league system is Nick Markakis. What kind of future do you see for him and when do you think he’ll be ready?

DM- I see him being a productive right-fielder who can be a solid run-producer and defensive asset. I don’t see him having an extraordinarily high batting average, but see good power potential (25-30 HR). I think he arrives in the midst of the 2007 season and establishes himself as an everyday player at the end of that year.

OTT- What does the Orioles outfield look like in 2009? Can any one of Markakis, Majewski, Fiorentino, or Reimold handle CF?

DM- I see Markakis (RF) and Reimold (LF) manning the corners, with someone else (Patterson?) in CF. I don’t think any of the four players mentioned can handle CF on a regular basis, though Markakis probably comes the closest. I doubt that Fiorentino and Majewski can out-hit Markakis/Reimold and would be outfield reserves if they were still on the club. Fiorentino and Majewski are on the fringe of being regular outfield corners and most likely settle-in as platoon outfielders.

OTT- One of the more interesting debates in the Orioles system is the merits of Hayden Penn vs. Adam Loewen. Where do you stand on this? What are each pitcher’s flaws and how do you see each progressing in 2006?

DM- I went Penn #2 and Loewen #4 on my organizational list. Penn is a more complete pitcher, though I thought he pitched tentatively with the Orioles. He needs to improve the rotation of his curveball and I’m not quite confident he can carry-over his strikeout rate. If the Orioles are patient with him and let him re-establish some confidence, he’s going to be special. Loewen, potentially, has better stuff, and as we saw in a limited sample (AFL), he can be dominating. Obviously, his command and curveball consistency are holding him back. He has a 50/50 chance of repeating his AFL performance in the minors.

OTT- So far, the 2005 draft class looks to be among the most successful in recent memory. Have you spotted any trends in Joe Jordan’s philosophy that may have inspired such a strong haul?

DM- The class looked good following the 2005 season as many of the top picks were college players. That’s going to happen naturally. I do like the aggressiveness he showed early by nabbing Brandon Snyder and going for unheralded guys (Olson and Reimold) who have excellent upside. I felt the Orioles really went after talent this year, instead of trying to draft for signability.

OTT- Speaking of the 2005 draft, Nolan Reimold instantly became the biggest power threat in the Orioles system. The only statistical flaw seemed to be a high strikeout rate. Do you see his ability to make contact being a problem as he moves into the upper minors?

DM- It is something he will have correct, especially at the upper minors when pitchers will be trying to get him to chase breaking pitches more often. Contact rate is an important hitting skill, but as long as he makes his power game-usable and continues to draw walks, he’s going to have offensive value.

OTT- Does Brandon Snyder have the tools to stick at catcher? How significantly could that impede his offensive development?

DM- His tool package puts him right on the edge, as far as being an everyday catcher. He has the receiving skills and a quick release, which offsets an average throwing arm, and he did nail 29% of attempted runners. Most catchers do stagnate offensively in the minors at some point, so it is likely that he’ll have a year or two where he struggles. I think the Orioles need to gauge what type of bat he has, and adjust his position and timetable accordingly.

OTT- Brandon Erbe dominated rookie ball competition in his age 17 season. What made him so successful? What adjustments does he need to make to carry that success forward? And, being that he’s already a hard-thrower, is there still some projectability left in him?

DM- His ability to add and subtract to his fastball with a cutter and change-up is his bread-and-butter. He pitches comfortably in the low-90’s, but is able to ramp-it-up to 95 MPH when he needs to. Most of the adjustments he has to make are mechanical. His high ¾ slot really isn’t conducive to a slider and he does tend to throw across his body. Correctable in both instances.

OTT- Not surprisingly, Jeff Fiorentino was clearly not ready for major league competition in 2005. He also seemed to struggle for a few weeks after being demoted back to Frederick. Do you see any potential long-term effects from his mishandling? Is he still seen as a potential every-day player?

DM- Not really and it isn’t uncommon for players to struggle after a promotion of this sort. As I mentioned earlier, he has the potential to be an everyday outfielder, but if he’s any more than your third best outfielder, the team isn’t going to be very good.

OTT- The Orioles seem reluctant to send prospects to AAA Ottawa. Is this more a reflection of its distance from the parent club or do the Orioles, perhaps, only see a nominal difference between Eastern League and International League competition?

DM- I would side with the nominal difference between the EL and IL. The EL is one of the better AA leagues from a ballpark-effect standpoint, so I think that allows them get a good handle on their players.

OTT- Was there any justification to leaving Sendy Rleal in AA a second year only to thoroughly dominate his competition yet again?

DM- I didn’t really understand that move, but they must have had their reasons. The only base skill that improved was his HR rate and he still doesn’t spin the ball real well, limiting his usage pattern in a bullpen.

OTT- Radhames Liz: starter or reliever at the highest level?

DM- In the book, I listed his Projected Role as a #4 starter/setup reliever, so you can see that I’m on the fence with this. He just didn’t have a reliable third pitch to go with his fastball and curveball, and that’s why he could go either way. At his age and level, I’m going to side with him being a setup reliever.

OTT- Garrett Olson was another from the draft class of 2005 that had a strong debut. His curve seems to be his highest rated pitch. How do his other pitches rate? Is he a candidate for a September cup of coffee in 2006?

DM- I rated his fastball as an average pitch at 87-92 MPH, though it is more important for him to keep the ball low (which he was highly successful at) rather than trying to overpower hitters. His change-up is a below average pitch and will need that next season as he likely pitches in AA. It’s possible that he becomes a September callup, but I think it will be 2007, at the earliest.

OTT- The Orioles seem to be collecting more relief talent than in years past. Many of these players have not overwhelmed scouts but have had solid track records in the minors. What kind of futures do you see for David Haehnel, Aaron Rakers, Eddy Rodriguez and Scott Rice?

DM- Haehnel- setup reliever, Rakers- short reliever, Rodriguez- short reliever, and Rice- situational reliever. Haehnel is the best of the group, though I’ve been pushing Rakers and his splitter for three years now.

OTT- Is there any hope for former prospects Keith Reed, Ed Rogers and Rich Stahl?

DM- No, no, and unlikely. Reed just doesn’t know how to use his tools, Rogers hasn’t played well, and Stahl may never be healthy for an extended period of time.

OTT- Are there any sleepers in the Orioles system you’d like to identify? Any players you could see taking a large step forward in 2006?

DM- I don’t know if you would call him a sleeper, but I really like Chris Britton and his knee-buckling curveball. He was very dominant at Frederick and I think he can be highly effective as a match-up righty. Scouts don’t seem to be too high on Luis Ramirez, but all he does is miss bats and win despite marginal stuff. I see Adam Loewen opening-up some eyes in 2006.

OTT- And finally, where would you rate the Orioles system compared to others? What about compared to the AL East?

DM- I think the Orioles have improved immensely over the last three years when they were considered one of the worst minor league systems in the game. I would put them somewhere in the lower-middle of all Major League teams. Half of their top ten weren’t in the organization two years ago, so I don’t see much in terms of immediate impact. Within the AL East, I’d have to rank them behind Tampa Bay and Boston, but probably on equal footing with New York and Toronto.

Well, that wraps up the first Q&A session here at Orioles Think Tank. I'd like to thank Deric once again for taking the time to participate. And, if you haven't yet, go buy his book.

Matos Re-signed

2006-02-06T18:28:00.000-05:00

Luis Matos has been re-signed for $1.6 million. I certainly don't mind keeping him around. Sure- he's nothing more than a fourth outfielder, but he provides some nice insurance against Corey Patterson's amazing ability to make an out over 70% of the time. Plus, he should provide solid defense and speed off the bench- two skills that the Orioles are not deep in. I also like that he provides a little more protection against having to bring up Markakis or Majewski before they are ready.

Javy Lopez has gone the way of Miguel "Bitchfest 2005" Tejada and rescinded his trade demand after meeting with the Orioles brass. Now, I would never imply that what Javy did was as classless or counterproductive as Miggy's antics. Javy wanted to retain full value in his walk year by being a full-time catcher and was willing to talk extension first- two important distinctions. But, I do wish the O's would move him for some younger talent that has a chance to help the club into 2007 and beyond. As a catcher, he has an above-average stick and below-average defense. As a first baseman, he'll have a below-average stick and, likely, below-average defense. He simply makes too many outs. So why not move him to a club that could utilize him as a catcher (ahem, Dodgers) and look to get a younger, better hitting 1B type (ahem, Choi) in return?

Spencer Fordin appears to be the new Orioles beat writer over at MLB.com. I don't think I've ever been too impressed with the quality of a lot of their writers, but I'll give Fordin the benefit of the doubt for now. In his latest mailbag, he argued that the Benson deal was beneficial if for no other reason than it will allow Hayden Penn time to develop in AAA. He's seriously the only other person I've seen make that point. On the other hand, he gets himself into trouble using the terms closer and relief ace interchangeably. Maybe he thinks Flanagan is progressive enough to use Chris Ray as a modern-day Goose Gossage. Maybe not.

Ramon Hernandez hit for the cycle and drove in five runs to lead the Caracas Lions (Venezuela) over Mazatlan (Mexico) in the Carribean World Series. The article also mentions that Miguel Tejada drove in a pair over in Maracay.

Everyone's favorite minor league aficionado, John Sickels, had a nice blurb up about Daniel Cabrera over at his blog. Like everyone else on the planet, Sickels identifies Cabrera as a prime candidate for a breakout season in 2006. Both his K rate and GB:FB ratio put him in some elite company. Now if he could only cut down on those pesky free passes.

Well, it's annual season, and I've already dropped a few Benjamins buying every prospect book/organizational review I can get my hands on. As I get deeper into some of them, I'll post some recommendations. For now, I'll point out that Sickels' book is always a keeper. Another that I've come across, that some of you may be less familiar with, is Deric McKamey's Minor League Baseball Analyst. If for no other reason, buy this book just to read about his methodologies. His credentials aren't too shabby either.

Do the Orioles Need Another Lefty?

2006-02-03T13:43:00.000-05:00

A lot of people out there in Orioles land have reservations about this year's bullpen. Of particular cause for concern seems to be the apparent lack of any credible lefthanders, accented by the departure of last year's relief ace, B.J. Ryan, and top set-up man, Steve Kline. The point of all this worrying is that you're supposed to have a guy that can come in and mow down a tough left-handed hitter in a high leverage situation, right? So, let's take a look at how some of the players that project to have roles in this year's pen have fared against lop-sided batters. What follows are the 2005 batting lines (BA/OBP/SLG) of left-handed hitters against much of the projected O's bullpen, followed in parentheses by the 2005 batting lines of all hitters (both lefties and righties) against the same pitchers.

LHP

John Parrish- 30 ABs, .200/.314/.333 (.279/.419/.382)

Eric DuBose- 48 ABs, .146/.241/.292 (.243/.356/.383)

Tim Byrdak- 56 ABs, .214/.323/.286 (.255/.380/.321)

Franklin Grascesqui- Not enough data

RHP

Jim Brower- 47 ABs, .277/.358/.447 (.282/.387/.479)

LaTroy Hawkins- 101 ABs, .228/.295/.366 (.265/.336/.420)

Chris Ray- 67 ABs, .284/.347/.478 (.222/.306/.373)

Todd Williams- 114 ABs, .263/.312/.307 (.252/.317/.339)

Aaron Rakers- 22 ABs, .227/.308/.364 (.220/.255/.480)

Orber Moreno*- 70 ABs, .229/.295/.300 (.239/.308/.313)
*2003-2005 data used

Sendy Rleal, Eddy Rodriguez- Not enough data

One thing that should also be pointed out is that B.J. Ryan actually authored a slight reverse platoon advantage in 2005 (but he was mighty dominant against both sides) and Steve Kline did everything but live up to his billing as shut-down lefty specialist (.317/.364/.515 vs. LHB).

A few other things jump out at me. For one; Parrish, DuBose, and Byrdak may not have marquee names, but all were very effective in their limited duty against left-handers in 2005. Another is that every righty listed not named Chris Ray pitched at least as well against left-handers in 2005 as they did against right-handers. Some of this is due to the natural fluctuation in the distribution of hits against relief pitchers, since by definition you are dealing with small sample sizes. In other instances, such as in LaTroy Hawkins' case, the reverse platoon advantage holds true over the larger 2003-2005 sample size as well. In fact, looking at Hawkins' and Kline's relative effectiveness against lefties last year, I am once again stuck scratching my head as to what the Giants were thinking with that trade.

Ultimately, two things can be drawn from this. One, don't get in a huff about whether or not a team has enough situational relievers. I mean, have you checked out the Angels bullpen recently? They had 27.7 innings pitched in relief by left-handers in all of 2005 and finished the year with a bullpen ERA of 3.52. The fact that almost every right-hander projected into the Orioles bullpen in 2006 shows no significant decrease in effectiveness against left-handed batters only reiterates how silly an overemphasis on handedness can be. Secondly, if you still don't buy into the first argument, then you can at least take solace in the fact that the lefties the O's do have performed pretty fairly against their own kind.

So let's hope the O's don't go out and address their need for a veteran LOOGY by throwing millions, or worse- prospects, at the first guy they see throwing with the wrong hand.

Forecasting 2006- Upper Minors

2006-01-31T17:03:00.000-05:00

Sorry it's been a while since I last posted. Today, I figured I'd look at a few players in the Orioles system that are either close to cracking the big leagues or have recently done so.

In this post, I'll utilize two forecasting programs-- Dave Szymborski's (of Baseball Think Factory) ZiPS and Nate Silver's (of Baseball Prospectus) weighted mean PECOTAs. I've provided the links so that if you really want to know how each of these works, you can check it out yourself. The short version is that they are both intricately developed, well regarded and highly utilized in stathead circles. I'll add some commentary and we can re-visit this post as the season wears on.

Onto the good stuff...

Nick Markakis, 22, OF

ZiPS- .266/.333/.398 in 417 ABs

PECOTA- .263/.326/.403 in 539 PAs

Well, that worked out pretty well. Both system's do not think Markakis is ready yet. Between Gibbons, Millar, Patterson, Matos, and Conine, one would hope that the OF is covered for the majority of 2006- and in this case, that's a good thing. I suspect that Markakis could exceed these projections, but that isn't saying much. Most intriguing to me about his development is that his production has increased across the board as he's moved up to each new level.

Nevertheless, let's hope that the O's stick him in AA Bowie or AAA Ottawa (depending on if they decide to actually send prospects to AAA next year) and leave him there until September. He's not so advanced that he can't refine his game at those levels and the O's will keep him on the cheap for another year.

Chris Ray, 24, RHP

ZiPS- 69 ip/75 K/23 BB/9 HR/3.91 ERA

PECOTA- 53 ip/43 K/ 21 BB/ 6 HR/ 4.12 ERA

PECOTA seems to be weighing Ray's 2004, when he was used as a starter in the low minors, too heavily. ZiPS comes closer to what I expect his K rate to be, but PECOTA is closer with regards to his BB rate and HR rate. Put it all together, and I am more optimistic than both systems.

Short-term, I think Ray could see a slight rise in his ERA from 2005 (2.66), but it will more likely due to his less-than-perfect control than his HR rate (as ZiPS is implying). He'll still strike out more than a batter an inning and be a league-average closer in 2006.

Val Majewski, 24, OF

ZiPS- .279/.332/.432 in 412 ABs

PECOTA- .277/.327/.460 in 243 PAs

Interestingly, both systems think Majewski is closer to be able to contribute than Markakis. PECOTA certainly penalizes his lost season in terms of plate appearances, but it certainly doesn't doubt that his power is major league ready. As I noted in a previous post, I like Majewski's chances to come back- even from a career-threatening injury. He will start the season in Ottawa and probably serve as a full-time DH for a while. His contact and on base skills should be there right away. Watch his power numbers to see how he's progressing. At this point, it would be a shame if he were promoted to Baltimore only to lose consistent playing time. Let him work out the kinks in AAA.

I'll predict that he gets a mid-summer call-up and that his power numbers will actually look better in Baltimore than Ottawa, since he'll be further away from his shoulder injury. He should be ready by 2007.

Hayden Penn, 21, RHP

ZiPS- 143 ip/ 112 K/ 63 BB/ 22 HR/ 5.10 ERA

PECOTA- Strangely missing... (EDIT: my mistake, check comments)

Well, the ZiPS projection looks pretty bad at first glance. Looking closer, however, the 7.1 K/9 are actually pretty intriguing. As I've said before, I think if Penn pitched full time in the show in 2006, we should expect slightly below average production with hints of promise that make us look forward to 2007. I think the ZiPS projection is pretty consistent with that. Fortunately, in my opinion, the O's filled out their five man rotation with the trade for Kris Benson. This should allow Penn some time to develop in Ottawa, at least until any injuries strike.

Left at one level, I'd expect Penn to have an exceptional year. But, I do not think he will respond well to shuttling back and forth between Ottawa and Baltimore. When the O's do call him up, let's hope they are willing to let him work out the kinks with consistent starts at the major league level. Otherwise, they'll only hinder his development. Ideally, that call-up wouldn't come before August and the O's brass would be smart enough to shut him down before he reached 170 ip.

Well, that's enough for now. I'll get to some more on another day. If there's anyone specific you want to hear about, let me know.

Syndication

2006-01-27T16:48:00.000-05:00

I'm quite flattered that a few of you have requested I put Orioles Think Tank into syndication. Apparently this means that those of you with news readers will be able to more easily keep tabs on when I update the site. So, that new orange and white button next to my website counter should take you to where you need to go. I'm still a little confused about the whole atom vs. RSS thing, but FeedBurner has a new service that is supposed to make one link universally accessible to different types of news readers.

A special thanks to reader Zachary, without whom I would have been even more lost in a sea of acronyms. And if any of you are able to utilize this new service, I'd really appreciate hearing whether or not you are having any problems with it (and if you are having problems, I am open to suggestions). As always, I can be reached at Mike@OriolesThinkTank.com

The Jay Gibbons Signing

2006-01-25T18:23:00.000-05:00

The Orioles have reached an agreement with Jay Gibbons for a four year contract extension at $21.1 million. In 2006, he’ll make $4.2 million, 2007- $5 million, 2008- $5.8 million, and 2009- $6.2 million. Let’s try and see if he’ll be worth it.

Background

Jay Gibbons was originally drafted by the Toronto Blue Jays in the 14th round of the 1998 draft. The Orioles acquired him in the Rule V draft in 2000. Since then, he’s posted the following lines:

2001 (Age 24)- .236/.301/.480 in 225 ABs

2002 (Age 25)- .247/.311/.482 in 490 ABs

2003 (Age 26)- .277/.330/.456 in 625 ABs

2004 (Age 27)- .246/.303/.379 in 346 ABs

2005 (Age 28)- .277/.317/.516 in 488 ABs

It should be noted that the apparent outlier in this sample, 2004, can at least partially be attributed to eyesight problems (which have since been corrected) and a back problem he suffered as a result of lifting weights in the pre-season. In addition, Gibbons’ BA/BIP in 2005 was only .268, an indicator that he was a pretty unlucky batter this past season (average is normally in the low .290’s). For comparison’s sake, Gibbons’ BA/BIP in 2004 was .276 and in 2003 it was .292.

Defensively, Gibbons is a converted first baseman-- which makes it harder to believe that he looked so silly there in the beginning of 2005. While it may be a little harsh to judge a guy on a 22 game sample, the O’s have apparently made their verdict and it is probably pointless to judge him anywhere but in RF. So anyway, as a RF, Gibbons has made marginal improvements each year and can no longer be considered the liability he once was. Just don’t start handing him any gold gloves yet, those are reserved for below-average fielders like Derek Jeter.

Analysis #1

First, I entered Jay Gibbons’ 2005 stat line into the Sabernomics Salary Estimator. Quickly, this tool incorporates these factors, to varying degrees: OBP, Iso. SLG, Service time, and position. If you want to read about this further, I encourage you to check out the highly informative blog linked above.

Since this tool incorporates whether or not the player is a free agent or merely arbitration-eligible (based on service time), the suggested salaries are going to vary wildly from 2006 to 2007 (when Gibbons would have been a free agent). So, I entered his 2005 stat line and moved his service time up one year for each year the contract extends to. So, these suggested salaries have not accounted for inflation. One other thing, these suggested salaries are based on MLB salaries during 2003. So the fact that contracts like those for Jeromy Burnitz and Jacque Jones have set the market around $5-6 million per year for decent slugging, low OBP corner outfielders is unaccounted for. Yes, I know I’m making lots of qualifications for this analysis but I still think it’s useful (or at least fun).

Here are the suggested salaries for the next four years (followed by his actual salary in parantheses):

2006- $2,174,090 ($4,200,000) – Suggested salary is so low because he is not a free agent yet

2007- $5,103,141 ($5,000,000)

2008- $5,993,017 ($5,800,000)

2009- $6,793,327 ($6,200,000)

To reiterate, keep in mind the following when reading these numbers:

1) They are based on 2003 salaries, which wouldn’t account for recent and future inflation. This would work in J-Gib’s favor.

2) Similar, but older, players like Burnitz and Jones have recently signed similar contracts, which again bears well for Gibbons

3) Quality of defense is not factored in, which would not work in Gibbons’ favor.

Analysis #2

As stated above, players that fit roughly into the Gibbons mold have recently signed lucrative contracts themselves on the free agent market, like Jeromy Burnitz and Jacque Jones. Burnitz has been an all-star caliber player in the past but is entering his age 37 season. Jacque Jones has similarly had two seasons where if you squinted hard enough, he looked like an all-star-- just not in the past two years. He will be entering his age 31 season.

Contracts:

Jeromy Burnitz- 1 year/$6.5 million-- with a mutual option that could bring the deal to 2 years/$12 million—Ages 37 and maybe 38 seasons

Jacque Jones- 3 years/$16 million—Ages 31, 32, 33 seasons

Jay Gibbons- 3 years/$17 million-- I’m throwing out the non-Free Agency year—Ages 30, 31, 32 seasons

2005 lines:

Burnitz- .258/.322/.435 with a .258 EQA

Jones- .249/.319/.438 with a .268 EQA

Gibbons- .277/.317/.516 with a .289 EQA

Defensively, both Burnitz and Jones are well-regarded. However, Burnitz's defense will do nothing but decline at this stage of his career and Jones' defense will have a much smaller impact in the cozy confines of the Wrigley corners.

Gibbons seems like the clear winner over this lot but consider the competition. If this is what this type of player is going for these days and the Orioles felt inclined to nab one, Gibbons was the correct choice.

Analysis #3

How will Gibbons age? Traditionally, one dimensional sluggers do not age particularly well. How likely are we to see this play out over the life of this contract?

To determine this, I looked at Baseball Reference’s top comparables for Gibbons. First, I weeded out the players that have yet to reach their age 32 seasons. Then, I looked at the players I assume most of you will be somewhat familiar with. Here are a few synopses:

Brian Daubach- Had his best season at age 29, contributed at age 30, then fell off a cliff during his age 31 and 32 seasons.

Larry Sheets- After showing early glimpses of potential, was utterly useless from ages 29-32.

Jay Buhner- I have to admit my surprise at seeing him listed on Gibbons’ comparables list, but- he was an all-star caliber player through his age 32 season when he began his steady decline phase.

Bo Jackson- Again, I was surprised to see his name, but he did have a similar approach at the plate- he was rendered useless by injuries except for part of his age 31 season and then was out of baseball.

I guess there is some promise in this comparables list. The only thing that it strongly suggests is that Gibbons is not likely to be a useful player in 2009- when he is set to make $6.2 million.

Conclusion

I think I’ve provided a nice set of pros and cons to evaluate in this post. On my end, the fact that free-agents will now be less likely to sign here than ever makes this extension more reasonable (Thanks again Miguel). On the other hand, the one area where the Orioles have some depth in the minor leagues is in the outfield. I’ll leave it up to you to make the final verdict.

The Kris Benson Trade

2006-01-23T13:48:00.000-05:00

Saturday, the Orioles traded Jorge Julio and John Maine for Kris Benson. Let's break this down:

What we gave up

Jorge Julio, 26, RHP

Jorge Julio started out his major league career with a promising September call-up in 2001 and an even more promising rookie campaign in 2002. That year, he posted a 1.99 ERA with 25 saves over 68 innings. In 2003 and 2004, he posted similar ERA's of 4.38 and 4.57, respectively. By the end of 2004, he had forfeited the closer's role to BJ Ryan. If the wheels were starting to come off in 2004, then there was no doubt about where Julio stood with the organization in 2005. For starters, he reported to camp 20+ lbs overweight. Despite pitching well in April, he ended the year with a career-high 5.90 ERA. His strikeout numbers declined slightly to 7.28 per 9 ip, but so did his walks (a career-low 3.01/9 ip). Looking a little closer at his numbers, it's easy to see that his decreasing effectiveness was mostly due to an absurdly high HR allowed rate (1.76/9 ip) and a record-high 10 wild pitches in 71.7 innings.

Julio is still young and still has his mid to high 90's fastball, so he'll get plenty more chances. Not to mention that teams like the Mets, however unwisely, love the fact that he has "closer experience". And he did end up faring pretty well in the Venezuelan Winter League this off-season, for whatever that's worth. Personally, I'd be surprised to see Julio approach his 2002 level of effectiveness, which in and of itself was pretty flukey. But if Rick Peterson can get him to stop alternating throwing the ball belt-high and in the dirt, then the Mets will have a reasonable middle-reliever for the tidy sum of $2.5 million. Anyone expecting more than that will likely be disappointed.

John Maine, 24, RHP

John Maine was the Orioles 6th round selection in 2002 out of UNC-Charlotte. Though his college career was undistinguished, he quickly flourished in the low minors. After dominating levels all the way up through AA in the early part of 2004, Maine was quickly making a name for himself as a top prospect. Unfortunately, like so many college hurlers before him, Maine's dominance came to an end when he reached AAA. After his promotion to Ottawa, Maine pitched 119.3 innings that saw his strikeout rate plummet (7.9/9 ip, down from 11.5/9 ip at his previous stops combined) and his walk rate rise (3.91/9 ip, up from 2.15/9 ip at his previous stops combined). In 2005, he posted similar ratios while posting a 4.56 ERA across 128.3 innings in Ottawa before a late promotion to Baltimore. There, he did little to strengthen his case by posing a 24:24 K:BB ratio across 40 innings, with a 6.30 ERA.

As I posted in the comments section of my Impact Rookie Pitchers article, Maine was likely destined to a long-reliever/swingman role to start 2006. Long-term, his ceiling is that of a #4 or #5 pitcher; someone who can eat up innings while posting less than inspiring peripherals and a below-average ERA. Of course, even that is dependent on Maine smoothing out some mechanical inconsistencies and regaining some of the control/confidence that made him so dangerous against younger competition. If things break right, he could end up as the next, let's say... Kris Benson. Imagine that.

What we got

Anna Benson, 29?, pain in the ass

If Anna Benson were a music video, you'd watch her on mute. But you'd still watch. She's sort of a ridiculously hot Ann Coulter, but with more dignity. I might spend hours at a time thinking about her, but she has no problem reminding us why I should be ashamed to do so.

Kris Benson, 31, RHP

After a stellar career at Clemson University, the Pittsburgh Pirates made Kris Benson the first overall pick of the 1996 draft. Despite struggling somewhat in the upper minors, the Pirates scooted him right along and he made his major league debut in 1999. It looked like a good decision in 1999 and 2000, as he posted strong campaigns that had many believing he would live up to his draft hype. Then came the injuries. Despite signs of fatigue at the end of 2000, and with no hope to compete down the stretch, the Pirates overworked a young Benson right into Tommy John Surgery. It was 2002 before he was again pitching in the major leagues. Since then, Benson has been a serviceable back-of-the-rotation type, never again approaching the 7.6 K/9 ip he reached in his sophomore season. Despite this, the Mets traded for him at the 2004 trading deadline and signed him to a 3 yr/$22 million contract that, at the time, seemed wildly out of line. In fact, many cite this contract as the cause of the inflated pitching market we know today.

In 2005, Benson posted a 4.13 ERA over 174.3 innings at a notorious pitcher's park in the National League. He managed an acceptable walk rate (2.53 BB/9 ip), but his home runs allowed rate (1.24/9 ip) and strikeout rate (4.9 K/9 ip, down from his career level of 6.14 K/9 ip) are less than inspiring.

Conclusion

Well, I guess the Orioles needed another pitcher and they made something happen. All in all, they did manage to get some value for some parts that no longer had a clear role on this team. Benson's contract, while ridiculous at the time it was signed, is now reasonable. Plus, the Orioles are only on the hook for a two year commitment .

"I'm definitely excited. It's something I was striving to do years ago," said Benson, speaking about serving as the staff ace. (source: MLB.com)

I suppose as long as Kris Benson and the fellows who write for MLB.com are the only ones that expect him to serve as our staff ace, then you won't be too disappointed. In reality, the Orioles traded an increasingly expensive flamethrower with little idea how to pitch and a 24 year old kid who may or may not have a future in the major leagues for a slightly below-average rotation filler with a nice little contract of his own. If there's anything to be overly excited about, it's that Hayden Penn might get some extra development time in AAA.

In news unrelated to Kris Benson, this struck me as a little bit funny:

"There was an assumption we made going into the offseason that he [Kyle Farnsworth] would choose to stay here,'' Braves general manager John Schuerholz told the Atlanta Journal Constitution. ''We didn't have a Plan B, C or D. We went into scramble mode.'' (source: Chicago Sun-Times)

Amazing how honest one can be to the press when you've orchestrated a decade and a half of dominance.

In addition, a Think Tank reader choosing only to be identified as Mojo sent me this link. I certainly like the guy in the #10 spot. And while this writer was clearly going out on a limb for a guy he probably best remembers for his April and May of 2005, Bedard did suffer an usually high BA/BIP last year at .323. Just one more reason why improvement can be expected.

Snippets

2006-01-21T17:02:00.000-05:00

The Orioles and Jay Gibbons are reportedly working on a three year deal worth $15 to $16 million. It certainly makes a lot more sense than Jeromy Burnitz or Jacque Jones. On the other hand, Gibbons will be 29 before the season starts and he's never gone a season where he made an out less than 68% of the time. Should an extension not be reached, Gibbons will be a free agent at season's end. When you're the Orioles, at this point, I think you're just happy that someone wants to stay in Baltimore.

Jorge Julio for Kris Benson talks have again surfaced. Last time this happened, Mets GM Omar Minaya purposely leaked the rumor in order to gauge interest from other ballclubs. This time, it appears the Mets are actually considering the deal. Most accounts are speculating that the Orioles would have to include a prospect in the trade, but I'd be very surprised if it were a top ten caliber player. Depending on who that prospect turns out to be, I definitely think this trade is in the best interests of the O's. I've said before that the best chances of the Orioles having a legitimate ace is continuing to develop their own young pitchers, but it couldn't hurt to have a little more depth in the middle/back of the rotation. This would allow John Maine to stay in the bullpen and Hayden Penn to stay in Ottawa until he's ready. Should this deal go down, I promise to do a more in-depth anlaysis of the players involved. (Edit: The deal was consummated. It's Julio and John Maine for Kris Benson. I'll break it down further on Monday. For now, I'm brainstorming about a counter for every stupid and oddly conservative rant Anna Benson has while in Baltimore.)

Mike Flanagan and Jim Duquette reportedly visted Miguel Tejada in the Dominican Republic. If you're inclined to think that Tejada should stay in Baltimore, than this certainly seems like a necessary step. What I'm more interested in is the fact that they also toured the O's baseball facility in Santo Domingo and surveyed potential sites for another academy. It is certainly encouraging that the front office is seemingly making this a priority.

Player Profile: Val Majewski

2006-01-18T22:24:00.000-05:00

It's no secret that the Orioles farm system is well stocked in the outfield. One player that seems to have gotten lost in the shuffle, however, is the 2004 Bowie Baysox MVP-- 24 year old OF, Val Majewski.

Background

After a successful college career as Rutger's first baseman, the Orioles drafted Val Majewski in the third round of the 2002 draft. Apparently seeing a bit more athleticism in Val than his college coaches did, they promptly switched him to the outfield. Since then, he's played the majority of his games as an above-average defender in RF, with the occasional start in CF. As a pro, he's posted the following lines:
(AVG/OBP/SLG, SB/CS)

2002 (SS Aberdeen, 110 ABs)- .300/.376/.464, 8/4

2003 (Low A Delmarva, 208 ABs)- .303/.383/.553, 10/1
2003 (High A Frederick, 159 ABs)- .289/.321/.509, 0/0

2004 (AA Bowie, 433 ABs)- .307/.359/.490, 14/4

Defensively, he improved at every stop. He improved his routes on fly balls with every year of experience (which makes sense for a converted first baseman) and by 2004, he had emerged as a potential five tool talent.

Unfortunately, during his September call-up, he tore his left (throwing) labrum. Hoping it would heal without surgery, he reported to spring training in 2005 and could not play through the pain. He ended up needing the surgery anyway and missed the entire season. Majewski was healed enough in time to play in the Arizona Fall League and Dominican Winter League as a DH. As could be expected, he started off rusty, but worked his way through to post decent campaigns in both leagues.

2005 (AFL, 73 ABs)- .274/.361/.384, 1/0
2005 (DWL, 58 ABs)- .293 /.406/.379, ?/?

Strengths

Obviously, Majewski has shown good contact skills and power throughout the minors. While he has been stretched to play CF, the very fact that it has been considered an option shows how far he's come on defense. He is also unanimously praised for his work ethic.

For example, one anecdote I've heard about Majewski is that his coaches could not find him anywhere one night on a Bowie road trip. The rest of the players had come back from dinner and cavorting and whatever else it is that kids do these days. They pounded on his door and got no answer. It turns out that Majewski had beaten everyone back to the hotel, even the coaches, to get a head start on a good night's rest before the next day's game. He was too sound asleep to hear them knocking.

Devastating setback or not, this is exactly the type of hard-nosed ballplayer that coaches trust to get the most out of his abilities.

Weaknesses

Baseball America recently rated Majewski's strike-zone discipline as the best in the organization. Consider this a passive-aggressive jab at the statistical analysis community. While he has taken his share of walks in his limited amount of AFL and DWL at bats, his plate discipline has been spotty at times. Long-term, it shouldn't be a problem, but it could take him a little while to adjust to major league pitching if he's not seeing enough pitches.

His injury could also cause a host of problems. Formerly thought of as a plus in RF, he could be shifted to LF if his arm strength doesn't come all the way back. It might even behoove the Orioles to shift him back to 1B. Think about it- it would save his arm, there is nobody blocking him there, and an optimist would tell you it avoids a potential OF logjam in the future. Of course, his bat won't play nearly as well if he can no longer handle CF or even RF.

Outlook

For 2006, Majewski should start the year in Ottawa. The Orioles will try to keep as many options open as possible, so he should see as much time in RF as his injury allows. If he rakes, he'll be in the majors with the first injury to Jeff Conine, Kevin Millar, Luis Matos, Corey Patterson, Jay Gibbons, Javy Lopez, or Melvin Mora. I could even foresee a scenario where he makes the team out of spring training as a 4-start-a-week 4th OF, if Luis Matos is moved before then.

More likely, it will be 2007 when Majewski finally cracks the starting squad full-time. Be it at 1B, RF, CF, LF, or even DH, the O's will have to make room for his bat. As disappointing as his injury was, it is still reasonable to think that a player of Majewski's work ethic can succeed in spite of it. He may not have the ceiling of, say, Jason Kubel, but he is certainly a safer bet.

Ultimately, I see Majewski as a slightly better all-around version of Jay Gibbons. Like Jay, he should be able to slug around .500, but with a better OBP and more athleticism. How he comes back from his torn labrum will dictate whether or not he becomes as much of a liability in the field.

Impact Rookie Pitchers

2006-01-16T20:56:00.000-05:00

Well it's been a couple of weeks since Miguel Tejada last attempted a tearful breakup with Peter Angelos. And, it looks like the front office isn't going to sign another middle-aged player that is but a shadow of their former self. So, without further ado, I give you the rainy day post on the top of my list: What kind of impact can we expect from the next crop of rookie pitchers in 2006?

Chris Ray, 24, RHP

Ray barely sneaks onto this list, coming in 9 innings under the rookie limit of 50. He should easily be the Orioles' rookie of the year and it wouldn't surprise me if he posted a campaign worthy of a few league-wide ballots as well. I try to keep a cool head about me, but Chris Ray is a prospect worth being excited about. He was a 3rd round pick out of William and Mary two years ago. A closer in college, the O's gave him a chance at starting in the low minors. In 2005, Ray was simultaneously promoted to AA Bowie and switched back to relief. No longer having to worry about developing off-speed stuff and solely relying on his mid-90's heat, hard slider, and plus splitter, Ray took the Eastern League by storm. He posted a 40:7 K:BB ratio in 37 innings, en route to a 0.96 ERA. Promoted to the bigs, Ray again struck out over a batter an inning with a 2.66 ERA. He might not be BJ Ryan in 2006, but he'll still be a capable closer at the highest level. And don't forget, it took BJ Ryan until he was 28 to post a season as good as Ray did in 2005.

Hayden Penn, 21, RHP

Penn started out the year gangbusters at AA Bowie (ed. note: first time I've ever used "gangbusters"), but struggled during an abbreviated promotion to the show. Jim Callis, of Baseball America, recently reported that the major league trial coincided with a "dead arm" period and that Penn should be fine in the long run, so this should be nothing to get worked up about. Not surprisingly, Penn struggled when sent back to Bowie before pitching well again down the stretch. Penn throws a low-90's fastball that can touch 96, with a plus change-up. His future success will likely hinge on the further development of his curveball. Look for him to get a few starts in AAA during April, when the sparse schedule makes a four-man rotation possible. After that, he would probably have to get injured to not be promoted, especially after the O's reportedly held onto him over the likes of AJ Burnett, Carlos Delgado, and Josh Beckett. In 2006, look for slightly below-average production with stretches of promise long enough to make you look forward to 2007.

Sendy Rleal, 25, RHP

How long does a guy have to dominate AA before he at least gets a shot at AAA? And it's not like we're talking about some 18 year old kid that has to be handled with kids gloves either. Probably the most overlooked failings of the 2005 front office was the way so many prospects were mishandled. While Jeff Fiorentino and Penn were rushed along for no particularly good reason, Rleal was actually held back too long. He has the repertoire and track record to be a capable set-up man in the long run. Look for him to compete for a middle relief job out of spring training and thrive if given the chance.

Aaron Rakers, 28, RHP

Long considered a AAAA pitcher by the O's due to his unimpressive repertoire, Rakers finally forced the O's to give him a September trial last year. If his 2.57 ERA across 294.3 minor league innings doesn't make you a believer, then his 11:3 K:BB ratio and 3.29 ERA in 13.6 major league innings should do a little to help his cause. Rakers is a good example of why signing players like Todd Jones for seven figure salaries is almost always a bad idea. For the league minimum, Rakers gives you just as good of a chance at 60 serviceable innings.

Others that could surprise: Cory Morris, Chris Britton, David Haehnel, Eddy Rodriguez

Think I forgot someone? Let me know and I'll add them.

C-Pat on C-Pat and more

2006-01-12T13:10:00.000-05:00

"'I'm a guy who can get on base, and if I can steal bases and get into scoring position, that would really help the team,' [Corey] Patterson said." --Source: Yahoo News

Every time I read that quote, I find something else wrong with it.

At http://www.minorleagueball.com, John Sickels is hosting the poll question:

"Prospect Debate for this evening and Thursday: Mets outfielder Lastings Milledge vs. Orioles outfielder Nick Markakis. Who would you rather have?
In terms of situation, look at it like an expansion draft thing: you are starting a new franchise and can pick one of these guys, but not both."

Markakis garnered 36% of the 330 votes cast.

Sickels also replied to a question I posed to him about Nolan Reimold. He stated that although Reimold was left off his top 50 hitters list, he would have come in at #51.

Apparently, a Bobby Abreu for Erik Bedard swap is all but dead. In terms of value, there are few players as underrated as Bobby Abreu has been in his career (maybe Brian Giles). I still have trouble figuring out where this fits into any plans the O's brass might have been concocting. Perhaps they realized that trading cheap young pitching for expensive and aging offense is not the best move for a team unlikely to contend in the short-term. Though, Abreu is the type to age well.

In other hot stove talk, the Orioles have apparently reached an agreement with Kevin Millar. For $2.1 million plus incentives, they could do a lot worse. Millar should provide a solid OBP off the bench and is still a good platoon option. Think of it this way, he could mean the difference between fourth and fifth place. But this likely means more Ottawa seasoning for everyone's favorite Mark Henry look-a-like, Walter Young. And that's not necessarily a bad thing.

In news few others care about, Perry Caravello got back to me regarding the impending release of the Windy City Heat DVD.

"Dude,
The DVD with "Behind the scenes footage" and Commentary from the Actors. Now this is Comedy Centrals FIRST DVD with Commentary from the Actors. Will on the market, as Bobcat said, "At The End Of Febuary."
So that is what I'm looking forward too. The Release of The DVD at the end of Febuary.

Perry"
It's interesting that, in Perry's mind, Bobcat Goldthwait capitalizes the first letter of every word he says.

The Corey Patterson Trade

2006-01-10T12:40:00.000-05:00

Yesterday, the Orioles acquired Corey Patterson for Nate Spears and Carlos Perez. Let's look at this from a few angles.

What we gave up

Nate Spears, 20, 2B

Spears was selected in the 5th round of the 2003 draft. His first two years with the organization, Spears showed excellent plate discipline in the GCL and Sally League with a combined 87 BB's to 95 K's. Last year, he regressed a bit in the Carolina League-- with 36 BB's to 82 K's. Not coincidentally, his power numbers spiked a bit and he posted 42 XBH's in 445 AB's. At a listed 155 lbs., it's tough to see his power progressing much further. This has led many to speculate that Spears will end up as a utilityman (often a lazy way of saying he's just an OK prospect), never hitting for enough authority to be a regular. Unfortunately, he is limited to 2B by his fringy arm, so he is pretty much a regular-or-bust type of prospect. His potential as a regular, then, will likely depend on his ability to get on base. To make that road even tougher, he is now in an organization that does not particularly value that skill. Grade C+ prospect.

Carlos Perez, 23, LHP

Perez is reputed to have some pretty decent stuff. He did register 146 K's in 151.3 IP last year at Delmarva. Yet, his hit rates are consistently higher than one would expect from a 23 year old with good stuff still in low-A ball. This could be because of bad luck or because he has poor control within the strike zone. In this case, I'm inclined to believe the latter, especially considering his other control idicators (61 BB's). So, when you hear other people calling Perez a LOOGY (Left-handed One Out GuY) type, they are likely being as lazy as those that claim Spears is a future utility player. The fact is, the guy is old for his league and has serious control issues. If they don't get resolved, Perez won't get out of A-ball. If they do, who knows? But how likely is that to happen? Grade C prospect.

What we got

Corey Patterson, 26, OF

Cubs fans are breathing a sigh of relief. No, they're not pumped up about seeing how Carlos Perez handles Lansing's opponents next year, they're happy to have dumped Corey Patterson. And not just for the $2.5 million savings. Corey Patterson was among the worst hitters in the major leagues last year: making an out 75% of the time, slugging .348, and striking out almost once a game (No- that doesn't make him a worse hitter, it just makes the negative perception more pronounced).

Patterson has all the tools. I don't need to remind you of this, it has been well documented. He was, in fact, the first cover-boy of the Baseball America Almanac. He was rushed through the minors and after some early struggles, he had successful 2003 and 2004 seasons. On the surface, 2003 looks like his breakout year. However, it was in 2004 that he looked like he might finally be on the path to posting acceptable OBP's, with 45 BB's in 631 AB's. Then, everything went downhill. His .215/.254/.348 line in 2005 is something only Cristian Guzman could be proud of.

Conclusion

I like this deal for the Orioles. It wasn't bold because we didn't give up anything- Spears is blocked by B-Rob, and Perez... eh. It isn't likely to help the Orioles because few people can succeed at the highest level with no concept of a strike zone. But, there is always the small chance that Patterson can build off of what he started in 2004 and live up to his former billing as the King of Prospectdom- even getting halfway there would be a big improvement over Luis Matos. And for that, I applaud the move.

I'd also like to point out that Corey Patterson is still 26. If I may go all apples-to-oranges for a second, remember when Roy Halladay was 23? He completely lost any feel for the strike zone and it shattered his confidence. Corey Patterson was never forced to adequately confront his plate discipline problem because Jim Hendry seemingly never realized it existed. I'm going on record to say that the 2006 Orioles should take a page out of the 2001 Blue Jays' book. Let's bump Patterson down to Frederick and demand that he take some walks or else. Every 150 successful AB's, bump him up a level. An entire year out of the spotlight, working out the kinks at levels he could dominate in his sleep could do wonders for Patterson, just like it did for Halladay. By 2007, I'd wager he'd be better equipped to handle a full-time major league gig than if we just give him some on-the-job training with our own swing at anything guru, Terry Crowley.

Miggy Being Miggy

2006-01-09T11:22:00.000-05:00

http://www.baltimoresun.com/sports/baseball/bal-sp.osnotes09jan09,1,2578051.story?coll=bal-sports-baseball

Yes, I hate the fact that the best player on the Orioles is now directly comparable to that drama queen up north as much as you do. But, Miguel Tejada's trade demand, and subsequent rescindment, has done more harm to the Baltimore Orioles than anything Manny Ramirez has ever done to the Boston Red Sox. After all, free agents are still going to be willing to play in Beantown.

Jim Duquette is now taking the position that the O's have no intention of dealing Tejada, even calling the teams with which he has had substantial trade conversations and notifying them. Personally, after the shock and most of the disappointment had worn off, I was excited by the possibility that the Orioles could turn this into a positive situation.

My contention has always been that the O's are probably two years away from contending and that efforts to compete in 2006 or even 2007 would only serve to push that date back. We are simply too many players away. Now, if the front office shared this view (they don't), along comes a PR dream-- The most valued property on the team demands a trade. Here is a guy that we could probably get three blue chip prospects for. Certainly, by 2008 we would be a better team having gone through with such a trade than not. And now the O's had the opportunity to do so without a huge media backlash.

Of course the Orioles saw this as an opportunity to look for the best star for star swap they could find, essentially trying to tread water and not significantly change the outlook of the franchise for 2006 or 2008. Now that Miguel Tejada has recanted, it looks like the front office probably won't deal him at all.

Looking at this with my strategy in mind, recent events may have actually helped the cause. I think it is quite likely that in the middle of July, the O's will be looking up at at least three teams in their division. If they suddenly get the bright (and right) idea to cut bait on Miguel Tejada at the trading deadline, teams will only be willing to overpay further for his services. Not only that, but no one competing for a playoff spot (and therefore interested in Miguel Tejada at the trading deadline), will be willing to trade their own superstars. So, in a perfect world, I might get exactly what I was looking for all along-- Miguel Tejada traded for some blue chip prospects.

I understand how many fans are hesitant to build for the future yet again. The O's have been fielding terrible teams for the better part of a decade. But, there is a light at the end of the tunnel. Unfortunately, it is further away than most want to realize. Riding out the contracts on older players, signing aging free agents (Thank you Jeromy Burnitz's agent), and trying to force the issue in 2006 will only dim our hopes for 2008.