DRaysBay

Rafael Soriano Is Slicker Than Your Average; Another look at Rays Bullpen Splits

2010-02-10T11:00:22Z

In most cases, a reliever is a specialist. Outside of the few elite relievers who can get batters out on both sides of the plate and in a variety of different ways, your average run of the mill relief pitcher is likely to be better at some things than others. Whether that is batter's handiness, or batted ball types, there is some kind of disparity. If not, then he wouldn't be a run of the mill relief pitcher.

Thanks to the new splits on Fangraphs.com, we can analyze players splits is ways we were unable to before (or at least not as easily). With that in mind, I decided to take a look at the six bullpen members that are most likely to make the opening day roster.

Looking at the top six candidates: Rafael Soriano, J.P. Howell, Dan Wheeler, Grant Balfour, Lance Cormier and Randy Choate, we know each pitcher has a different skillset. Choate is a LOOGY, Cormier is a groundballer and Soriano is a strikeout machine. Joe Maddon's job is to combine all these unique talents into one successful unit. Beyond the ground ball/fly ball and handiness differences, this group has potential for platoon usage based on who is or isn't on base. Here are the career platoon splits, bases empty and runners on, for the six names above.

Empty	K/9	BB/9	HR/9	FIP
Balfour	12.15	4.57	0.73	3.07
Choate	8.22	3.67	0.29	3.07
Cormier*	5.88	3.86	1.88	5.94
Howell**	9.13	3.77	0.98	3.88
Soriano	10.17	2.67	0.83	3.04
Wheeler	8.18	2.06	1.35	4

Runners On	K/9	BB/9	HR/9	FIP
Balfour	8.89	4.78	0.85	4.02
Choate	6.51	4.58	0.48	4.28
Cormier*	5.12	4.69	0.68	4.56
Howell**	8.01	4.4	0.92	4.38
Soriano	9.46	3.02	1.12	3.69
Wheeler	7.69	3.4	0.93	3.94

*As a reliever over the past two seasons, Cormier has posted a 3.9 with runners on and a 4.3 without.

**As a reliever over the past two seasons, Howell has posted a ~3.5 in both situations.

Please remember these are just numbers. They aren't absolutes and aren't magic tarot cards. Nonetheless, they don't lie and should give you a better indication on which split works best for each pitcher.

With the data for all six cases, Grant Balfour and J.P. Howell are best suited as inning starters or taking over mid-inning without a visitor waiting on-base. They are far from terrible with runners on, but the goal is to optimize their strengths especially in Balfour's case. Howell's numbers have been more balanced since his move to the bullpen. Rafael Soriano and Randy Choate would also fall into these categories, but I'll get to them later.

Moving along, we can see that Dan Wheeler and Lance Cormier (looking at the last two years) like Balfour and Howell aren't terrible either way, but are slightly better when there are already a few ducks on the pond. Randy Choate is clearly better with the bases clear, but his role is so defined that unfortunately he'll be brought in to face that left-handed batter regardless of the runner on situation. Soriano is also better coming in with the bases empty, but is pretty damn good either way.

If a starting pitcher is struggling and is facing imminent danger with runners already on, then depending on the handiness of the batter, and point of the game, it would seem that Cormier, Wheeler or Choate would be your best options. Wheeler is a ROOGY where Choate is a LOOGY; Cormier fits somewhere in between.

If your starter's day is done, and you are able to start off your bullpen's night with a fresh inning or without runners on, Balfour and Howell seem like the smart choices. Through various posts we concluded that far too often last season that a starting pitcher would begin an inning off by allowing a base runner and in turn Balfour was called in off the bench. According to the split data, this is not the best way to introduce him into the game.

As mentioned, these numbers look great on this site, but rarely does a game work out so perfectly that you can stick to a script. However, this should give us a better understanding of which reliever should be used when. Each game is its own beast and a variety of factors play into bullpen usage. Personally, I would never think to invite Wheeler into a game with men on base over Balfour or Howell, yet my eyes/perception seem to differ from the data.

In the case of the Rays, some relievers are better off starting their night with a moment of clarity. Other's are at their best facing 99 problems. In either case, it is best to take the most likely road to success before it's on to the next one.

B.J.'s Balls On The Ground

2010-02-10T02:16:49Z

I did it. I figured it out. It was so brilliant, yet so simple. Thanks to the new Splits feature at FanGraphs (addicting), I've figured out how to fix B.J. Upton. Just tell him to hit more line drives. That's it. You don't need a new hitting coach or some fancy schmancy formula to fix B.J. Just scream "HIT MORE LINERS!" at him Burgess Meredith style*

*there's probably more to it than that

The table below shows the players who had 300+ at bats last season and their wOBA on the liners they hit. Only one player comes within 90 points of Upton. It's an extremely small sample size, but Albert Pujols only posted a wOBA of .829 on liners last season. So, there's that.

Name	wOBA on Liners
Jason Bartlett	.699
Carl Crawford	.707
Ben Zobrist	.703
Evan Longoria	.785
Willy Aybar	.601
B.J. Upton	.877
Carlos Pena	.787
Gabe Gross	.665
Pat Burrell	.705
Dioner Navarro	.659

A Preemptive Complaint About Kevin Kennedy

2010-02-09T23:43:47Z

From the comments section at U.S.S. Mariner:

I was listening to XM Radio the other day, and Kevin Kennedy was criticizing Bill James because "He said that the 8th inning is more important than the 9th [and they tried a bullpen by committee and it didn't work]." He went on to talk about how once they got Keith Foulke, an established closer, they took off and found success. This was quite a while ago, and people within baseball still point to it as a triumph of hidebound traditional reasoning over creative, sabrmetric [sic] analysis.

Rafael Soriano is a fantastic pitcher who makes the Rays better and clearly improves the bullpen, which was a weak spot when all was said and done last year. He's good. We're all glad we have him. Hopefully he's going to rack up saves, strikeouts, and saliva like nobody's business.

That being said, he's going to be overrated as much as any player in recent memory. That's not his fault and shouldn't be held against him. It's just something you have to accept when the Sori-storm arrives.

Kevin Kennedy is going to rant and rave about this guy for the wrong reasons; those being A) his role B) his experience. There's a reason I don't particularly care for his analysis skills, and this fits right in. He's a generic analyst who latches onto old timey wisdom without ever challenging the conventional. He's also a generic baseball manager.

This makes me miss Joe Magrane and adore Joe Maddon even more.

The Last Annual Hype Post of the Year, I Promise

2010-02-09T23:00:07Z

I was a few hundred words into my opus on psychological egoism and then I read Carson Cistulli's DRB Annual intro and I deleted the entire thing. Inadequacy is a horrible feeling and a production killer - ask Dioner. So instead of that, here's a post that only exists to pimp the annual. Last time before the 19^th, I promise. My points:

It's not finalized, but we're already over 30,000 words. The final version of last year had something like 26,500 words. So yes, more bang for your buck.
Fantastic analysis on David Price and Matt Garza. Graphs, screen grabs, and charts. The whole shebang from those two chapters alone.
Trance L examines how the Rays have avoided signing a free agent starting pitcher since Andrew Friedman grabbed the reins.
Hellickstone's ridiculously long and detailed evaluation of batters. It's everything you would want to know about the Rays' hitters ... if you were the opposing pitcher.

2/19 can't come soon enough.

Nyjer Morgan's Defense

2010-02-09T17:25:37Z

Nyjer Morgan's Defense

I was lucky enough to contribute to ESPN's Hot Stove U series. The piece is about -- what else -- a talented centerfielder's defense.

Many thanks to Dave Cameron and the ESPN folk for the opportunity.

Why We Watch The Games

2010-02-09T11:00:29Z

More photos » Mike Carlson - AP

5 months ago: Tampa Bay Rays' Carlos Pena, right, is congratulated by teammates Willy Aybar, left, and Gabe Gross after driving in the game-winning run in the tenth inning of a 5-4 win in a baseball game against the Texas Rangers Saturday, Aug. 22, 2009, in St. Petersburg, Fla. (AP Photo/Mike Carlson)

Browse more photos »

As I sat in the bar, watching the game wind down and the final seconds tick off the clock, you could see it on their faces and in their joyous expressions. No, not the players, though they surely felt some of it too. I'm talking about the fans. I couldn't hear them, mind you, my ear drums now tomato red from the bleeding they had endured at the hands of the seemingly never ending chant of "WHO DAT!?" that filled the air over the previous four hours. The sound was irrelevant. It was the sight I was focused on.

While I watched the madness unfold in front of me, I realized I was jealous. Not of the outcome, I had seen fans of other teams celebrate their championships over the years and it never affected me one way or the other. No, I was jealous of the emotion. The pure jubilation on the faces of the New Orleans faithful is something that most sports fans are enormously envious of, wheather they'd like to admit it or not. I know I am. I want that for my favorite team. Obviously every fan base gets excited when the team they root for wins a championship, but that feeling differs depending on the team and situation. I can't prove this, but I'm guessing that winning a title to Saint fans feels a bit different than it does for, say, Yankee fans. If you could somehow bottle up and sell the feeling that all Saints fans had Sunday night, you'd be a billionaire over night.

We count down the days until the start of spring training each year because of that feeling. We watch 162 games because of that feeling. We go through the emotional highs and lows of each series, each game, and sometimes even each pitch because of that feeling. We care far too much about who is going to win the final bench spot and which player is going to pinch hit in the bottom of the 8th because of that feeling. This area was given a little taste of the feeling in 2008 when the Rays won Game 7 of the ALCS, then had it rudely taken away. Now that we know how it tastes we're like a junkie jonesing for the next fix of the good stuff. The disappointment of 2009 has only strengthened that desire.

Football is over. Spring training is merely weeks away, and the hunger to attain that feeling begins anew. Though this franchise is still young, and will never know the plight of a team like New Orleans, let's hope this is the season it happens. I'd really hate to be eternally chasing the dragon like Cub fans.

DRB Photo Caption/Shop Contest #2: The Shaving Cream Pie Edition

2010-02-08T22:00:26Z

More photos » Chris O'Meara - AP

Browse more photos »

The first ever DRB Caption Contest ended and the result could not be any clearer. The DRB community has spoken and Marky Mark's Third Nipple was the leader with 33 Recs. Congratulations. Who will be the big winner this week? All you need to do to enter is photoshop the above image or come up with a creative caption. Please Rec all of your favorites. Can someone dethrone the current champion who turned this:

via lh4.ggpht.com

into:

"Cruisin down the street in my six-fo', Jockin the bitches, slappin the hoes"

by Marky Mark's Third Nipple on Feb 1, 2010 3:30 PM PST reply actions 33 recs

As for the two runner-ups:

Derek Jeter just got pwnd!!!!

on Twitter @CubsStats23

by B Ray on Feb 1, 2010 7:27 PM PST reply actions 7 recs

Cody Cipriano's promising AFL campaign was cut short when SternFan sniped him from the right field bleachers while Cody was distracted by a line drive.

Heard in the distance, "Get off my lawn!"

Follow Me on Twitter @FreeZorilla

by FreeZorilla on Feb 2, 2010 2:48 AM PST reply actions 7 recs

On Greatness and Carl Crawford

2010-02-08T11:00:18Z

More photos » Elaine Thompson - AP

(AP Photo/Elaine Thompson)

Browse more photos »

This is not terribly Rays related, but I swear I get there in the end. My train of thought is a bit odd here, so just follow me if you will (I promise it's going somewhere). I love baseball history and since we're so baseball-deprived right now, I can't resist taking a bit of a spin through time.

Who remembers the 1990s? I got a bit nostalgic the other day while looking through my baseball card collection (...why do I admit these things? Yes, I'm a tool) and started thinking about all the great moments from that decade. Well, the second half of that decade; the strike was a stinker, although that happened just before I became a big baseball fan. Maybe it's that I was still a kid at that point, but the emotions and memories from that decade seem so strong and poignant, like I just lived them yesterday. I cherished the McGwire and Sosa homerun race, and that image of them embracing towards the end of the season is burned into my brain. I remember my dad waking me up to watch the Yankees win the World Series in 1996, and me not being able to fall asleep again afterwards from sheer excitement. I remember Griffey as an icon - the smiling poster-boy for baseball - and Alex Rodriguez as one of the greatest hitters ever. It seemed like everywhere I turned, I read or saw something else about how A-Rod had a good chance to break Aaron's record and to my tween-ish self, it seemed inevitable. Baseball was great and A-Rod was the best there was.

A decade later, things have changed a little bit on that front. A-Rod still has a shot to end up in the 700 homerun range, but it no longer seems preordained to me. Actually, when looking at A-Rod's statistics, I can't help but think, "Wow, A-Rod's declining." He's no longer a consensus number one fantasy pick, and if you look at his historical WAR numbers, you realize that he's slowly slipping down from superstar level to all-star. Just look at how he performed this past decade (using Sean Smith's historical WAR data):

	WAR
2000	11
2001	8
2002	8.2
2003	7.7
2004	6.2
2005	8.4
2006	4.2
2007	9.9
2008	5.4
2009	3.9

Blame last year on his injury if you want and I admit that A-Rod will more than likely be better this year, but the point remains that the years of WAR values consistently above 7 are long over. A-Rod is 34 this season and it's well within the realm of possibility that he's going to keep declining. Of course, the best players in baseball history still remain great players well into their late 30s, so we'll simply have to see how A-Rod ages. While A-Rod while undoubtedly go to Cooperstown when he retires, how fast he declines could end up determining if he goes in as one of the best of his time or one of the best of all-time.

"Greatness", though, is such a hard to define concept.

One could argue that A-Rod is already one of the best players of all-time, considering he has 580+ homeruns and ranks 21st all-time in historical WAR values for position players. There are so many different layers of great, though. Part of it's public perception, part of it's true talent, and part of it's an individual feel that differs from person to person. For instance, growing up a Yankee fan, a part of me considers Joe DiMaggio, Mickey Mantle, and Roger Maris as legendary greats because they're the names I grew up learning about. The historical WAR totals for these players vary from legendary to merely great - Dimaggio, 83.4; Mantle, 120.2; and Maris, 39.7 - yet I know more about them than I do about such players like Eddie Collins (126.7 WAR), Stan Musial (127.9), Joe Morgan (103.5), and Eddie Matthews (98.2). Like I said, "greatness" is far from a hard and fast category.

Now, Pujols is awesome, right? I think we can all agree on that. It seems to me that Pujols has stepped in during the past couple of years and usurped the unofficial "Best Player in Baseball" title away from A-Rod. He's put up some incredible seasons recently, seems to possess legendary talents, and doesn't seem to be slowing down at all. However, Pujols is younger than A-Rod and just turned 30 about two weeks ago, so here's where my mind went next: how does A-Rod's career compare with Pujols' career to this point? Were both of them on a similar track up through age 30 or was one better? And since both Pujols and A-Rod are considered legendary talents, how do their careers through age 30 compare with some of the all-time greats? Here's what I found:

Historical WAR Totals

	Pre-Age 30	Career Totals
Cobb	84.8	159.3
Ruth	81.9	172
Williams	79.7	125
Pujols	76.6	76.6*
Mays	76.3	154.7
Aaron	76.1	141.5
A-Rod	75.6	99.1*
Griffey	68.7	79.2*
Bonds	67.2	171.4
DiMaggio	62.4	83.4
Thomas	48.9	75.9

*Active Player

There's so much I could say from looking at this, I barely know where to begin. Basically, holy cow - Pujols and A-Rod both deserve to be called legendary, top-10-in-baseball-history talents. Their pre-age 30 seasons rank right alongside Ted Williams, Willy Mays, and Hank Aaron, with Pujols having the slight edge over A-Rod despite breaking into the league at an older age. Who knows where they'll end up, though; you notice that there's a wide range of outcomes for these players, with them landing anywhere between 125 WAR (Ted Williams land, although he missed a year and a half off his peak due to WWII) and 170 WAR (which only Ruth and Bonds have managed to break). Where will they end up? Who knows? Their most comparable players are Mays and Aaron, and they ended up in the 140-150 WAR range, which seems about right. However, there's Griffey on this list as a reminder about how things can change; he looked destined for greatness and he still has had a great career, but 80 WAR is far short of 140 or even 125. The players at the top of this list weren't just great young players, but they were great old players as well.

(Oh, and I included DiMaggio and Frank Thomas on the list as mere comparisons, to give you some idea of how ridiculous those numbers at the top of the list are. We're talking incredible, earth-shattering talent here and it's easy to forget that when you don't give yourself a bit of context.)

Anyway, I've written over 1,000 words already and I still haven't connected this back to the Rays yet. Where the heck is this going? Well, after spending this time considering greatness, my mind, like it normally does, ended up on the Rays. I've spent a lot of words talking about greatness and how variable it can be, so in your mind, who do you consider the greatest player in Rays history? I'm not going to both conducting a poll because I feel like once you stop to think about it, the answer is obvious: Carl Crawford.

In his career so far, Crawford has amassed 21.3 WAR, which is certainly a far cry from the players we've been talking about, but is still certainly no small feat. He's about 2-3 seasons away from cracking into the list of Top 500 players of all time and when you considering how many thousands of players have played professional baseball, that's a great accomplishment. He may never be a hall of famer, but he's our talent and our star for these past eight seasons and he we should certainly appreciate that. He was a glint of light on hopeless team after hopeless team, and he's given me more joyful memories than I can count. Not only has he been a great player, but he's been one of my favorite players to watch. We've been lucky to have him.

And so, the whole point of this is to remember that greatness comes in all sorts of shapes and sizes. A player doesn't have to be one of the all-time greats to make it onto someone's personal list of greatest players. Crawford may not be in the same class as Pujols or A-Rod, but I know that years from now, he'll be the main player that I'll be telling stories about when I think of the 2000-2009 Rays. Remember that time he stole 5 bases in one game against Boston? Or what about that catch he made in the all-star game? This upcoming season may very well be his last on the Rays, so don't take him for granted. If nothing else this season, take some time to appreciate the greatness of Carl Crawford.

DRaysBay Turns Five

2010-02-08T11:00:17Z

I feel like I've written far too many of these type of posts the last three months. It's awkward to write. Anyways, congrats to the alumni, current staff, and anyone who's ever read or commented here - even if only to complain about the Red Sox banner ads. Many thanks to the network's tech team as well.

Use this as your open thread for the day if you so wish.

The Best Shape of My Life (And Other Performance-Enhancing Tales from Spring): Jeff Niemann's Cutter and Splitter

2010-02-07T00:05:26Z

More photos » Steve Nesius - AP

Browse more photos »

During the season, Jeff Niemann began throwing a splitter (as documented elsewhere), but during his final appearance of the 2009 season, he also began throwing a cutter. The Brooks Baseball pitchfx page is here and no cutters are actually recorded. Look at the slider average and max velocities however. Some pitchers do throw sliders in upwards of 90 miles per hour - David Price and Felix Hernandez for two - but we have seasonal data on Niemann that suggests his slider sits in the low-80s.

Even more, look at the comparison of velocity and movement between NIemann's "slider" in that game and the one that Lance Cormier throws. Believe it or not, Niemann did not pick this pitch up from Cormier, or James Shields, or anyone else. He just gripped the ball with what amounts to his cutter grip and felt comfortable throwing it during pre-game warm-ups. Eventually he felt comfortable enough to use it during games, and gave the Yankees a cutter-heavy diet that saw a few whiffs - something uncommon when it comes to Niemann's collection of fastballs.

Unfortunately this is the only game where he unleashed it, and the sample size is so ridiculously small that to say whether it will be a worthwhile pitch or not. There's a very good chance Niemann is a better pitcher when it comes to processes this season, but worse when it comes to results. Only time will tell if the cutter and splitter contribute.

Previous installments can be found here.

Attendance Analysis (Pt. 5): The Power of Success

2010-02-06T11:00:21Z

Man, I'm such a slacker. It's been awhile since my last post on attendance (which I know you are all waiting for with baited breath), but thankfully PlayOnWords and thebaddancingraysfan have stepped up and raised some very good questions in their respective Fanposts (here and here). How much of an impact will Obama's high speed rail have on the Rays? How much of the Rays' attendance issues are to blame on the stadium's location and the lack of quick, accessible public transportation? I'm not from the area and can't speak from experience, so please check out the discussions in their posts if you're interested. In my opinion, though, I believe that the Trop's relative inaccessibility does make it tough for fans to attend weekday games and it probably limits the number of Tampa businesses that have season tickets, which the Rays seem to understand themselves already. To what extent? That's tough to say, but I'd argue that it's an important factor but not a crippling one. It's not the be-all-end-all solution that people in support of a new stadium seem to be claiming, but I do think it's having an impact nonetheless and shouldn't be overlooked. And if a new stadium doesn't seem to be in the cards anytime soon, why don't the Rays pursue improving the Tampa-St. Pete public transportation system? That's just a discussion idea, so have at it.

Anyway, down to what I promised I'd talk about next: winning. How much of an effect does winning have on attendance figures? I mentioned this in an earlier post, but team attendance figures (as measured by Att+) correlate strongly with team winning percentage. Here's the breakdown:

	Win % and Att+
Year n	0.523
Year n-1	0.449
Year n-2	0.344
Year n-3	0.253
Year n-4	0.175
Year n-5	0.116

Okay, that's a bit confusing, so let me explain.

I've taken a league-wide sample and included every season back to 1961, trying to determine how much of an effect a team's winning percentage in past seasons can have on a team's attendance this season. What you're seeing are the correlations between a team's winning percentage in Year n, n-1, n-2, etc. and that team's Att+ figures in Year n. For example, say Year n is 2009. The correlation between 2009 Att+ and 2009 winning percentage is .523 (strong), the correlation between Att+ in 2009 and winning percentages in 2008 is .449 (medium-strong), the correlation between Att+ in 2009 and winning percentages in 2007 is .344 (medium-to-weak) - and so on. In other words, the farther back in time you go, the less and less it matters how a team has performed. Fans do have memories, but mostly only of the past two seasons.

That seems like really good news for the Rays, right? We've been competitive for the past two seasons, so maybe that means fans will have forgotten about the past and we'll see an even better turnout this year. That very well might be the case; I don't really know. The most important thing to take away from this data, though, is that the best predictor of attendance is how well the team is performing now. I tried creating a weighted Win% average of the past couple of seasons that would correlate even stronger with a team's Att+ than their current Win%, but I couldn't do it. Maybe I was simply screwing up (which is entirely possible), but no combination that I could come up with correlated any stronger with Att+ than this season's winning percentage. If the Rays want to draw even more fans this upcoming season, they need to win and they need to be in the race for the playoffs.

Of course, that's common sense. Fans support a winner! But in this case, common sense is actually right.

David Price's Stalker

2010-02-05T19:16:30Z

David Price's Stalker

I don't think SRQMan ever went to Philly.

Welcome RZ to the Staff

2010-02-05T16:00:25Z

Quite a few of you wanted this in the Open Box thread so here we go.

For those unfamiliar with RZ, he's done his thing at the (thanks to MVN) defunct Rays Party site, Rays Prospects, his personal site, and even the FanPosts section. His skill set is unlike anything you've seen here. Check out this. And this. And of course this, for an idea of what might be coming.

Hopefully he's here for a while before a team snatches him up.

The Hype (or lack their of) for Sean Rodriguez

2010-02-05T11:00:22Z

It's amazing how perception can pump up or diminish a player's perceived value. If enough people board the hype train, a player's status in the eyes of the casual observer can greatly be enhanced. If a player's hype is mere whispers from an online community, then regardless of what stats or scouts say, that player is likely to be under-appreciated.

With that said, let's look at two minor league teammates from the 2009 season. Besides being teammates, these players will both be newly 25 years-old to begin the 2010 season. Both have the ability to play the 2B/SS/3B portion of the infield. They also have similar major league experience which is ~225 plate appearance with neither setting the world on fire.

In 2009, they both racked up over 425 plate appearances in the Pacific Coast League. Their results at the plate placed them among the league's best hitters. One of them is penciled in as an opening day starter with his major league team while the other is in a battle for a roster spot; a back up roster spot.

Player A hit .293/.353/.557 last season which earned him a .387 wOBA and an ISO of .264. He played mostly short stop and was ranked -6 runs below average by total zone. Player B on the other hand hit, .299/.400/.616 with an ISO of .318 and a Barry Bonds-ian .437 wOBA. He played mostly average second base, but can fill in at short stop as well as the outfield.

Brandon Wood, Player A, will be (barring injury or transaction) the Angels opening day third basemen. Player B, Sean Rodriguez, might not be on the Rays opening day roster at all. Of course, this is more of a testament to organizational depth, but we barely hear a peep about Rodriguez around these parts.

Sure, in our own little community Rodriguez already has more nicknames than plate appearances as a Rays' player, but to the casual fan Sean John The Baptist is one of those guys we got in that salary dump for Scott Kazmir. For those keeping score, in addition to Rodriguez the Rays also acquired Matt Sweeney and Alex Torres in that trade; both ranked in Keith Law's top 10 organization prospects.

I'm not sure what they are saying in Los Angeles about Wood, but he's been talked about for a while now. I'm sure the fans are excited to see what he can do with his first real chance to prove himself at the next level. Meanwhile, in Tampa Bay, those aware that he exists are hoping Rodriguez can win a utility role.

In Rodriguez, some see the potential for a super utility player with power. Personally, I see a starting infielder with at least average defense who can also mashed the cover off the ball. Stuck in a system where he is forced to moonlight as a bench player, this no doubt sucks for Rodriguez. Odds are if he was still with the Angels he would likely be competing with Wood for that starting role. If things go as planned (or at least my plans), Rodriguez's play will make his name for him. As for now, it's a wonderful little secret to have.

Boston's Newest Reliever

2010-02-05T01:18:44Z

More photos » Reinhold Matay - AP

Browse more photos »

Joe Nelson signed with the Boston Red Sox.

This is unfortunate because I'm supposed to hate Boston. I say supposed because I've never really signed on with hating anything - even soulless entities - over territorial rights. Boston doesn't help this matter by being smart, playing in one of the sacred baseball yards around, and providing some fantastic entertainment when they do play the Rays. I guess most of the distaste stems from their fan base. Some of their supporters' roots are faker than Ben Chapman's home run while others' run deeper than Jackie Robinson's bruises. Hatred of the other team's fans is natural though. Even some of the Rays' fan base finds me annoying as all hell, I can only imagine what people I don't share a common bond with think of me.

This is also unfortunate because I like Nelson. A difference maker he is not. His 2009 season left most in the area with a sour taste in their mouth, if not a souvenir off the bat of an opposing slugger. Things were good at first then quickly turned ugly. Even with a demotion, Nelson failed to locate the strike zone which inevitably lead to his demise as a member of the organization. There's maybe three bright spots about Nelson's tenure here. Those being:

1. The Vulcan Change-up

There's only so many pitches, so much degree of separation on velocity and movement, and so many deliveries to separate this middle reliever from that one. Best as I can tell, a small handful of pitchers throw the split-fingered change (Eric Gagne, Keith Foulke, and Nelson at last count, oddly each with Boston ties at one point or another) and for reasons similar to R.A. Dickey or R.J. Swindle, this makes them a bit more interesting to track. For a middle reliever's stuff to gain attention it either has to go fast (to the plate or to the stands), move a lot, or have a gimmick behind it. Nelson's had two and at times completed the trifecta.

2. The self-deprecating humor

Two excerpts from an outstanding interview with Jesse Spector:

6. Have you ever played as yourself on a video game?

JN: Yes! Didn't do well, either. I'm not good at video games, but I think it's MLB 2002 was the first time -- it was the one with Derek Jeter on the cover, and somebody called me and said, "Dude, you're in this game." I ran over to their place and I was like, "I wanna pitch with myself." First ball I threw, I threw for a strike. Then, when you're not very good -- A, I'm not very good, but B, they didn't make my character very good -- I got tired after like three pitches and started getting hit around the ballpark. I'm like, "This is a really realistic game!" But yeah, I did it once. Other people have called me and yelled at me, said, "Your guy is not very good in this game!" I know. Sometimes I trick 'em, sometimes I don't.

9. Complete this sentence: I am the only player in Major League Baseball...

JN: Who married their radiologist when they blew out their elbow. I think I'm the only one.

TB: How did that happen?

JN: I was in Triple-A, in Richmond, and my wife was in her last year of residency, doing a fellowship. And she did an arthrogram, told me she could show me on the arthrogram that I tore my UCL and we've got to get an MRI, so they did an MRI. I walked back with her to get the results and asked her why she wasn't married. She said because she doesn't date doctors, and I said, "Well, that's good. I'm not a doctor." So I asked her out that night, and now I've got three beautiful kids and a beautiful wife, and I'm probably the only one who actually married their radiologist.

TB: You went right after it.

JN: Well, I knew I was gonna be out a year, so I had a little time.

That's not quite Ichiro level stuff, but awesome nonetheless.

3. The career

Nelson was a fourth-round pick out of the University of San Francisco. He made his debut at the modest age of 26. Five years later Nelson would record his first ‘full' Major League season. Two years after that Nelson would ink his first (and almost certainly last) contract worth a million. I've raised this point before about toiling minor league relievers, but pitching baseballs for your next month's rent seems less than enjoyable. Nelson waited longer than A.C. Green to enter the public's consciousness. There's a non-zero chance he's never in the Majors again, and that's a bit disappointing.

So I'm not really supposed to root for Joe Nelson anymore. I hope Boston fans do it for me. Even if they can't do it as well.

'Ramirez Provision' Doesn't Affect Tampa Bay Rays

2010-02-04T22:29:18Z

Backstory:

Last March when Manny Ramirez signed a two-year $45 million contract with the Los Angeles Dodgers, there was a provision placed in the deal that required Ramirez to donate $1 million of his salary to Dodgers team charities. Team owner Frank McCourt then said that he was going to implement this "Ramirez Provision" into all future Dodgers' contracts that would require players to make a donation of their choice to the charity.

Resolution:

Under the agreement between the commissioner's office and the players union, this "Ramirez Provision" can still be included contracts that meet the following guidelines:

• The player signing the contract is a free agent, because after all, a free agent isn't required to sign with anybody so he's agreeing to the provision.

• The player is signing a contract extension that buys out at least one year of that player's free agency. An example of this would be the extension Justin Verlander just signed with the Detroit Tigers.

Meaning:

The provision is allowed as long as the deal covers at least one free agent year. I can't think of a single Rays extension that didn't include at least an option for one free agent year. Even Kelly Shoppach's deal. Frankly this is much ado about nothing, considering Ramirez' deal came while he was a free agent, which is completely fine given the new rule.

Mike Ekstrom and Lance Cormier Come Together Like Two Pieces of Metal

2010-02-04T18:52:37Z

How can you tell that we're in the final two weeks of the off-season? Because Mike Ekstrom is getting entire posts devoted to him. Some random thoughts:

Ekstrom is a former starter who dabbled in relief work for the Portland Beavers last season. He averaged 5.71 batters faced per appearance. During his 2007 stint as a full-time starter, he averaged 23.8 batters faced per appearance, and once he arrived in San Diego as a full-time reliever, he averaged 6.9 batters faced per appearance. Why does that matter in the least? Well, last season Lance Cormier averaged 6.2 batters faced per appearance and a little over 7 per in 2008. Ekstrom's starter history combined with the fact that he's not as good as Cormier could lead to a little role reversal if both break camp in the pen.
When Ekstrom pitched last season, he did so usually in wo inning spurts. There's a difference between throwing two innings in one outing and throwing in back-to-back days - the latter of which the Rays heavily value* -- but his usage wasn't that of a ROOGY.
The Book states that leverage doesn't affect pitcher performances. So, if Cormier is really a 4 RA reliever, then he should be a 4 RA reliever whether he's pitching in low leverage or medium leverage situations. I don't doubt that this works out if the sample size is large enough, but as soon as Cormier blows a lead or two, watch for the torches and pitchforks to come out.
The transition may have began already, although this is going to look like a series of arbitrary periods, here's how Cormier's seasonal leverage index breaks down:

April: 18 IP 0.21 pLI

May: 19 IP, 0.86 pLI

June: 7 IP, 0.60 pLI

July: 11.1 IP, 0.26 pLI

August: 10 IP, 1.08 pLI

September/October: 12 IP, 1.50 pLI

Obviously 22 innings of data is going to come with some pretty huge error bars, but Cormier held a .716 OPS against in high leverage situations and a .641 OPS against in low leverage situations. That means pretty much nothing, so yeah.

*There's an entire chapter in the DRB Annual about Joe Maddon's managerial usage tendencies. Here's a spoiler: he loves changing pitchers. Hal McRae was essentially a managing atheist though.

Open DRaysBay Fantasy Baseball Thread

2010-02-04T17:00:17Z

For those clamoring for a DRB-centric league, do your plottings here. For those who couldn't care less about fantasy baseball, stay tuned, real baseball talk forthcoming.

Why the Rays Underperformed Their WAR numbers (Batting Edition) II

2010-02-04T11:15:09Z

The Rays accounted for 84.9 Park-Adjusted Runs Above Average at the plate in 2009 according to Fangraphs WAR. That is to say, they accounted for about 8.5 Wins Above Replacement Level at the plate alone, without accounting for Defense (6.95 wins), Pitching (16.9 wins), Replacement (20.7 Wins), and Positional (-2.1). For now let's concern ourselves with the batting number, of 84.9 park-adjusted wRAA. Remember this is based off wOBA (linear weights). This does not account for base/out states or leverage. This solely factor the result of batter vs. pitcher in a vacuum.

Instead of using wOBA linear weights, let's consider the team's net change in run expectancies using base/out states (RE24). As a team, the Rays posted a RE24 of 36.29. How does the Rays' wRAA/RE24 relationship stack up when to the rest of the AL with above-average offenses?

Team	PAwRAA	RE24	RAA/RE24
Rangers	1.8	10.02	0.18
Angels	91.7	92.77	0.99
Red Sox	98.8	67.67	1.46
Yankees	205.9	130.67	1.58
Blue Jays	48.8	22.24	2.19
Twins	59.9	25.6	2.34
Rays	84.9	31.21	2.72
Indians	38.2	11.21	3.41

The 4th column gives an idea of a team's efficiency at stringing together hits or rallies. The Rays were second from the bottom well behind their ALE brothers. Its interesting to note the Rays have hired their new hitting coach, Derek Stanley, from the only team to struggle worse than them at translating their wOBA talent into real runs.

If we factor in leverage, WPA gives the following:

Team	WPA	wRAA	wRAA/WPA
Rangers	0.61	1.8	2.95
Angels	9.46	91.7	9.69
Yankees	12.82	130.67	10.19
Red Sox	4.01	98.8	24.64
Rays	1.38	84.9	61.52
Twins	0.78	59.9	76.79
Blue Jays	-3.08	48.8	-15.84
Indians	-4.64	38.2	-8.23

Again, the Rays underperformed their ability in higher leverage situations relative to their ALE brethren. The Rays struggles with run distribution over the season were much discussed in 2009. This further validates that notion. RE24 highlights the struggle to string together rallies, while WPA adds the element of leverage to the discussion. Hopefully, in 2010, the gods of random noise can shine brightly upon the Rays.

Why the Rays Underperformed Their WAR numbers I: Intro to wRAA, wOBA, RE24 and WPA

2010-02-04T11:00:20Z

Last week DRB user _David_ questioned if bad luck with strand rates was the reason the Rays won 84 games in 2009 vs. their Fangraph's WAR total of 51 which would equate to about a 98 win season. I'm going to attempt to look at some descriptive (not predictive) stats to add some context. If anything looks incorrect, please speak up and we can all use this as a learning experience.

The batting component of WAR consists of park-adjusting wRAA (runs above average) based on wOBA (weighted on-base average). wOBA consists of using linear weights of each type of event where a batter reaches base successfully relative to the total plate appearances. Per the Book, the formula is:

(0.72xNIBB + 0.75xHBP + 0.90x1B + 0.92xRBOE + 1.24x2B + 1.56x3B + 1.95xHR) / PA

The next step is to figure out how far above/below average a player's wOBA is using the formula: (wOBA – lgwOBA) / wOBAScale * PA, where the wOBAscale typically is around 1.15. This gives a pretty idea of the player's value at the plate, hence why park-adjusting wRAA results in the batting component of WAR values. What this stat does not do is tell us anything about how the player fared situation-ally based on the 24 possible base/out states or situational leverage based on the score margin and inning. For that we have two more stats; RE24 and WPA.

RE24 is a player's aggregate runs above average based on the 24 base/out states. It marks the change in the team's run expectancy for the inning before the plate appearance and after.

Per Tango:

RE 99-02	0	1	2
Empty	0.555	0.297	0.117
1st	0.953	0.573	0.251
2nd	1.189	0.725	0.344
3rd	1.482	0.983	0.387
1st_2nd	1.573	0.971	0.466
1st_3rd	1.904	1.243	0.538
2nd_3rd	2.052	1.467	0.634
Loaded	2.417	1.65	0.815

To begin an inning, a single or a walk will raise the run expectancy from .555 to .953. The player would be credited with an RE24 of .398. If a player came up with two out and the bases empty and draws the same single or walk, they would be raising the inning's run expectancy from .117 to .251. The payer would be credited with a RE24 of .134. Is the player who walked with no one on superior to the player who walked with two outs? No, but it describes to us the significance of the event. What aspect does RE24 fail to describe? It does not account for how much change in run expectancy impacts a team's chance of winning. Hitting a solo home run in the 4th inning down 10-0 provides the same RE24 as a walk off solo-shot in the bottom of the 10th inning.

That's where WPA comes in. It involves the same base/out states as RE24 but it also takes into consideration the margin of score and the inning through the use of a leverage index. Again, we aren't measuring player's ability so much as telling a story of what happened. There is little difference in skill between a solo shot in the 3rd vs. a walk-off grand slam, but the relative magnitude is captured by WPA.

How can we apply these stats to the 2009 Rays? Move forward to part II. In the meantime, if any of this looks incorrect, please speak up. Or feel free to ask additional question you may have. If no one on staff has an answer I'm sure R.J. can dig through is little blackbook and find someone who does.