Attepted Ranking of Outfield Arms

(Reuters Photo)

The Hardball Times attempted to rank the best outfield arms of 2007. This is the third year that they've attempted to measure outfield arms with their own sabermetric formula. John Walsh who created the system to measure outfield arms claims his systems is "concise". And to his credit, he does measure a multitude of factors, such as how often a runner is thrown out or held from advancing in virtually every situation imaginable.

As for the best outfield arms of 2007, according to the formula, here are the top arms based on how many runs they saved their teams (according to Walsh):

1. Alfonso Soriano: 17.0
2. Mike Cuddyer: 14.6
3. Jeff Francoeur: 12.2
4. Shane Victorino: 12.2
5. Delmon Young: 10.8
6. B.J. Upton: 8.5
7. Willy Teveras: 6.1
8. Alex Rios: 5.6
9. Jim Edmonds: 5.6
10. Mark Teahan: 5.3
11. Ichiro Suzuki: 5.2
12. Ryan Freel: 5.0
13. Melky Cabrera: 4.5

Looking at those names, I didn't have any issue with the rating system. In fact, I was excited about it. But when I saw the ratings for the Red Sox, I became a bit skeptical. Here they are:

Coco Crisp: - 0.2
Manny Ramirez: -1.5
J.D. Drew: -3.1

Now I don't know about you, but I find it hard to take a system seriously that says Coco Crisp has the best outfield arm on the Red Sox. And I'm even more critical when the same system says that Coco Crisp actually has an almost average arm. As someone who watched almost every Red Sox game last year I can confidently say that Coco Crisp clearly has a well below average arm. It's sabermetric formulas like this one, which are in conflict with common sense at times, that cause people to doubt sabermetrics in general.

So John Walsh's system likely needs a little tweaking. I have a feeling it's not ballpark independent. The fact that right Field in Fenway Park is so large probably influences Drew's rating negatively. From what I've seen, Drew has a slightly above average arm for an outfielder. At least it's pretty apparent that Drew has a better arm than Manny Ramirez. I'd also be curious to know what Walsh considers to be holding a runner.

If a hitter drives the ball to the wall, and then runs into second base as the outfielder backtracks to retrieve the ball, is that the same as a hitter advancing to second base on a misplay by the outfielder? And if a ball is hit down the line in right field at Fenway Park, it's going to take a lot longer for the outfielder to retrieve the ball than it would a ball was hit down the left field line in Fenway. I doubt Walsh's system factors this in.

I'd also be curious as to how he weights his factors. Stopping a runner from going from first to second, and getting into scoring position, obviously has a different value than stopping a runner from going from second to third. I wonder if he weights those two factors accordingly.

But I have to give Walsh a lot of credit for trying. I don't see why someone wouldn't be able to eventually come up with a rather accurate sabmermetric formula for rating outfield arms. And with a little tweaking, Walsh's system could be improved. Sabermetric formulas are always being refined and improved to be more accurate. It's rare that a complicated sabermetric formula is created, and then not improved on somehow down the line.

Sox On the Basepaths

Kelly O'Connor

In addition to providing projections for hitters and pitchers in 2008, the Bill James Handbook also rates the base running abilities of players. James provides every hitter in the majors a baserunning rating. These ratings are based on how factors such as bases taken, advances on outs, advancing extra bases on balls put in play, stolen bases, and outs made on the basepaths.

I'll provide two numbers. The first number is their baserunning rating. The second number is the percentage of the time that a player scored once they got on base (largely dependent on their spot in the order).

Jacoby Ellsbury: +13, 31%
Dustin Pedroia: +3, 34%
David Ortiz: +5, 30%
Manny Ramirez: -1, 29%
Mike Lowell: -11, 23%,
J.D. Drew: +6, 33%
Kevin Youkilis: +10, 28%
Jason Varitek: -23, 22%
Julio Lugo: +20, 29%

Alex Cora: 33%, +3
Coco Crisp: 35%, +37

Based on this information, you could make a case for Youkilis batting second in the order. He is a much better baserunner than Pedroia. Last year, Youkilis was rated the best baserunner on the team. For the second year in a row, Varitek was the team's worst baserunner. Overall in 2007, the Red Sox ranked as the 11th best baserunning team in the majors.

Santana - Why the Red Sox Package Makes Sense

When news of a possible Santana deal first broke, Peter Gammons speculated that it would take a package including Chien-Ming Wang or Robinson Cano, plus a premium prospect. Months later, the Twins are struggling just to get a premium prospect. I think it's fair to say that the demand for Santana isn't as high as many expected it to be.

This is likely due to a few factors. First of all, the salary that Santana would command really limits to the teams he could be dealt to. And the list of teams that the Twins could match up with in a trade is even further limited by Santana's no-trade clause. It's unclear which teams Santana would accept being dealt to, but most likely due to financial restrictions, only a few teams showed serious interest in Santana: the Mets, Red Sox, and Yankees.

As for a Mets, they simply didn't have the prospects to be a good match. And so any Santana deal would require them to give up a major piece of their major league team such as Jose Reyes. To no one's surprise, the Mets didn't bite.

As for the Yankees, Brian Cashman has become very conservative about trading young prospects. The Twins had to fight so hard to get Phil Hughes included in a deal, that once the did, the Yankees were unwilling to budge on any more talent. The best package that the Yankees seem willing to provide is a rather weak package of Phil Hughes, Melky Cabrera, and Jeff Marquez. And if Cashman had his way, Hughes wouldn't even be on the table.

So that leaves the Twins with the Red Sox. Like other teams, the Red Sox aren't willing to offer a star major league player in return for Santana. But the Red Sox do offer one thing that other teams don't, multiple quality prospects in Jon Lester, Jed Lowrie and Justin Masterson. In addition to offering multiple quality prospects, the players the Red Sox are offering, would also fill the most holes for the Twins.

The Twins need a center fielder, a middle infielder, and since they've already dealt Matt Garza, they could use multiple pitching prospects. Ideally, those pitching prospects would be able to help out the major league team either in 2008, or fairly soon after.

The quantity available in the Red Sox package makes sense for the Twins for multiple reasons. First of all, the more cost controlled players the Twins receive in a deal, the more money they'll be saving on the free agent market. This has to be an utmost concern for a cost conscious team such as the Twins.

By dealing Santana for multiple quality prospects, it also diversifies the Twins investment. You could consider Johan Santana capital, and the Twins would be trading in that capital for stocks, which the they hope develop into good investments. Well, if the Twins were to trade Santana for Phil Hughes, Melky Cabrera, and Jeff Marquez, what would happen if Hughes didn't work out as well as he's projected to? They'd lose almost all of the value that they received in the deal.

On the other hand, if the Twins were to acquire Jon Lester, Jed Lowrie and Justin Masterson, they could still get a good deal of value out of the deal if one of those prospects didn't work out. Would the Twins be getting equal value for Santana? No. But the Twins are in a rather odd position in that regard.

If the Twins do not trade Johan Santana, they would not be able to afford him when he hits the free agent market next year. And if Santana leaves via free agency, which he almost certainly would, the Twins would receive only two sandwich draft picks for compensation. That chances of those draft picks being as valuable as Jon Lester, Coco Crisp, Jed Lowrie and Justin Masterson are very remote.

The Twins could go into the season with Santana, hoping to trade him at the deadline, but Santana has said that the wouldn't allow a trade mid-season. So the Twins will likely have to take whatever the best offer is on the table going into next season. Currently, that offer appears to be that of the Red Sox, and there are no indications that other teams are willing to offer a better deal.

I expect the Twins to play poker a little longer, hoping the Red Sox will up their offer with the inclusion of Jacoby Ellsbury. In the end, however, the Twins will likely have to give up their bluff, as they aren't the ones holding the cards. They simply don't have the money to afford Santana, so they'll have to get the best value possible for him. And in order to do that, they'll have to trade him soon, even though it's not the best market for him.

Buchholz vs. Hughes

Sorry if that title's misleading. I don't mean for this post to be a pissing match between Red Sox and Yankees fans, each claiming that their pitcher is superior. I would encourage discussion regarding the two pitchers, but this post isn't truly meant as grounds for comparing the two pitchers So, in case you were wondering what inspired the title, here it is.

Keith Law had an open chat today. One of the participants was a Yankees fan from New Jersey, who wrote in with the following question.

"Merry X-mas Keith… Anyone who thinks bucholz is equal to hughes has never looked at anything but a box score… Their pure stuff is comparable, but before the injury, Hughes had a slight edge all around, but hughes is also three years younger and still developing physically. Bucholz is where he’s going to be physically, especially in terms of power (which translates to break on his secondary pitches). Scouts having followed them consider Hughes to be a more intelligent, polished pitcher, despite being younger. Hughes has no personality issues, and showed in the playoffs that he can step into a big spot and come up even bigger. Bucholz has already been arrested and is a spoiled rich kid who thinks he can get away with anything. Hughes mechanics are considered fairly sound, none of his pitches thought to be serious injury risks. Bucholz mechanics on his breaking balls are ‘whippy’ and put a lot of torque on his arm. there is a lot of question how, especially as thin as he is, if his arm will hold up. so… even if there stuff is comparable, age, polish, mechanics, body… all go in favor of hughes… it’s why he was the highest rated pitching prospect in baseball coming into 07."

Keith Law then responded with the following:

"Merry Christmas to you too. I have zero idea where you get any of this from. Buchholz’ raw stuff > Hughes’. When Hughes has two secondary pitches as good as Buchholz’ curve and change, you give me a call, OK?"

Now I've heard many Yankees fans tell me that scouts value Hughes more than Buchholz. But who are these scouts? To be honest, I don't care what scouts have supposedly said. When you read scouting reports it's often unclear when the scouts have done the reports or what organizations these scouts may be affiliated with. Anyone can go out and find a scout who thinks their guy is the real thing. I prefer to rely on my one eyes, not the eyes of some other, semi-anonymous person.

Keith Law seems to be equally confused by who these "scouts" are, and how their opinions are relevant, or accurate. He makes the point that Buchholz does have some incredible secondary pitches. Anyone who saw Buchholz pitch in the majors last year can attest to how filthy his changeup and curve looked.

And I found it humorous how quick the fan was to attack Buchholz' "character issues." Funny how a one time incident when the pitcher was in high school is indicative of character issues. If a one time incident by a high school student is indicative of character issues, then what does that say of Andy Pettitte? Did he not show a one time lack of good judgment ate age 30, when he was an adult major league pitcher who took hGH?

Furthermore, Yankees prospects have been infamously overrated for years. Remember when pitchers like Brien Taylor, Mark Hutton and Sterling Hitchcock were supposed to be the next big things in the early 90's? Not one of them turned out to be the top of the rotation starters they were billed as.

The Yankees play in New York City, their prospects will always have more hype surrounding them, especially in times when the major league team hasn't brought home in a championship in a while. But the reality of the situation is, regardless of how great a name Melky Cabrera has, he still barely outhit Coco Crisp last year, by .006 points in OPS and he's an average defensive player. Maybe it's just me, but I find it hard to be excited about anyone who hits like Coco Crisp.

I think it's rather mundane to try to claim either pitcher is better than the other. They're in their low 20's and neither one has pitched even half a season at the major league level. Both are works in progress and fans of either pitcher will only see what they want to. The issue of which pitcher is better is one that we will all have to wait to observe.