Nice! Way to go SG!

Yay! The new site looks just like ... the old site!

Great to see the breakdown of the baserunning stats. Is there a more elaborate description of these somewhere?

1.5 WAR is surprisingly low, I would have pegged Posado as closer to a 2.5/3 win player than a 1 win player, even with regression.

But I guess if he hits your personal prediction of somewhere between his baseline and 65% he’ll be worth about 2 wins which ain’t bad.

Also, as analysis becomes more refined do you think there will ever be a decent metric in the vein of catcher ERA to try to pin down a catcher’s game calling skills. Right now all we have is word of mouth. And very few people are going to call their catcher out for calling a poor game.

Oh God. I missed it so.

Yay for non complicated comments!

Is there a more elaborate description of these somewhere?

Dan Fox is the guy behind the stats, most of which are behind B Pro’s pay wall, but the links to his Hardball Times articles in this blog entry are pretty helpful.

1.5 WAR is surprisingly low, I would have pegged Posado as closer to a 2.5/3 win player than a 1 win player, even with regression.

ZiPS and PECOTA kill his average projected offense.  If they’re wrong he should be about seven or eight runs better offensively and closer to 2.2-2.3 WAR.

Also, as analysis becomes more refined do you think there will ever be a decent metric in the vein of catcher ERA to try to pin down a catcher’s game calling skills. Right now all we have is word of mouth. And very few people are going to call their catcher out for calling a poor game.

I think more granular data like Pitch F/X will get us closer, since we probably need to look at things like approach as much as or even moreso than results.

- Does Posada call a different pitch selection than his backups? 
- Does he frame pitches better/worse than his backups?
- Are pitchers a little more conservative with runners on third base and fewer than two outs with Posada compared to his backups?

While I doubt we’ll ever be able to totally quantify everything (and I’m not sure we want to get to that point), I think we’ll start seeing inroads that improve our understanding of catcher impact beyond the obvious.

Thank God!  It’s looks great.  Nice job.

From the other site…

Hughes, just plain wrong. He dominated the minor leagues along the way. Yes they brought him up when they had a need, but it’s not like they promoted him A+ or anything - he was making AAA hitters look silly before they called him up in 2007.

Hughes wasn’t rushed nearly as much as Joba but he basically skipped AAA.  He was making them look silly but in an extremely small sample size.  He wasn’t given a chance to fail in AAA.  Besides it’s not just about the numbers (or shouldn’t be).  He needed to refine command and control of his secondary pitches.  He can get away with more in the minors because the hitters aren’t as good but he should be working on them anyway. 

They signed Damon when Melky was 20 years old and had barely played above AA, and what he had done above there wasn’t pretty. I’d still contend they gave him lots of chances, and it wasn’t that it “just kind of happened”.

They signed Damon and Matsui got injured.  Then in 2007 they had Matsui, Damon, and Abreu but Giambi got injured.

- PECOTA, from Baseball Prospectus. Although it had a bad season last year and so far this season seems to be fraught with problems, it’s been a very good projection system prior to 2009, although their claims about deadly accuracy are stupid.

Last year was the first year PECOTA wasn’t run by Nate Silver.  With the election he moved on to bigger and better things.  If 2010 is as bad as 2009 (and let’s face it they are off to a really bad start) it might be time to stop paying attention to PECOTA

Sweet.

Also, as analysis becomes more refined do you think there will ever be a decent metric in the vein of catcher ERA to try to pin down a catcher’s game calling skills.

In terms of pure pitch selection, there would be the confound of knowing which calls, if any, came from the bench and which ones were called by the pitcher.

In terms of pure pitch selection, there would be the confound of knowing which calls, if any, came from the bench and which ones were called by the pitcher.

That’s part of what makes it an issue. Also, we know that pitching performances vary from year to year and talent levels can change. That makes it even more difficult to compare catcher performances in terms of pitch/game calling. It would be nice to have some idea other than “so and so calls a great game,” though.

Who knows, maybe Varitek really has been reasonably valuable due to his game calling abilities.

Olney looks at the Posada/Burnett relationship in today’s column, although he neglects the sample size and matchup issues.

Woohoo ! Doomsday clock is back !

Comments in a logical order!

Besides it’s not just about the numbers (or shouldn’t be).  He needed to refine command and control of his secondary pitches.

Of course not, and I doubt highly the Yankees took it as such.  But they had a highly-rated prospect dominating the minors (yes, in a small sample), AND a need in the majors.  IIRC, in addition to being their best pitching prospect, he was their best option in AAA at the time.  Most any team would have called him up at that point.  And then he was pitching well - both before and after the injury - against major-league pitching.  Not dominating, but holding his own.  And oh by the way, he was pitching fairly well in the majors last year before moved to the bullpen.  Hughes does not, and has not for a while, needed more time in the minors.  The only gain he would have there over the majors is getting his IP total up over 160.  Hughes wasn’t mishandled, he got hurt, which happens to young pitchers.

They signed Damon and Matsui got injured.  Then in 2007 they had Matsui, Damon, and Abreu but Giambi got injured.

I’m not sure where the point is.  They had injuries, they called up their best prospect to fill in.  Prospect played well but *not* great, so next year they keep him on as a 4th OF, and when there is injury he’s a starter again, and then he’s handed CF in 2008.  How is this different from other teams?  Most teams don’t keep a prospect in the minors if they have a need for that player, unless they are specifically trying to keep him away from arb/FA.  Most teams give the prospect PT based on how well they play.

Oh, and I figured the new site would surely have the ability to turn any table into a pie-chart based on user preferences!

Also, it’s not like prospects never jump from AA to the majors. It’s definitely not the norm, but it isn’t totally uncommon.

And then he was pitching well - both before and after the injury - against major-league pitching.  Not dominating, but holding his own.  And oh by the way, he was pitching fairly well in the majors last year before moved to the bullpen.  Hughes does not, and has not for a while, needed more time in the minors.  The only gain he would have there over the majors is getting his IP total up over 160.  Hughes wasn’t mishandled, he got hurt, which happens to young pitchers.

Hughes had 2 QS out of 7 starts. One excellent.  One horrible.  He wasn’t great but he was a serviceable 5th starter who should have stayed in the rotation and given a chance to develop. 

But I understand where you are coming from.  I’ll agree 2007 was good but because of it he did skip over AAA and 2008 and 2009 was a step back from that.  With the steps back, the skipping over AAA, and 2009 in the bullpen it would be a huge mistake for him to wind up back in the bullpen in 2010 and give up on him a starter.  And with only 1 rotation spot, the Yankees win now attitude, and their past success in the bullpen it’s hard to see any scenario where either Hughes or Joba aren’t in the pen for good in 2010 (they won’t be long relievers).  And if they pitch well for another full season in 2010 in the pen, they are most likely there for good without even being given a fair shot. 

On most other teams, both Hughes and Joba wouldn’t have been this delayed by a win now attitude and they aren’t in this spot right now so that does qualify as being mishandled in my book.  Maybe it will all work out and both will be in the rotation in 2011 (I hope) but right now it’s hard to see how without a big injury that sidelines one of the top 4 for a few months rather early on in 2010.

I in part blame Mo for tricking people into thinking late inning relief pitching is really important.

I’m not sure where the point is.

That the plan was never to give him a shot.

I think with respect to Hughes, we have a moral hazard problem both for the Yankees and Hughes.

Say Yankees, in fact, want to develop Hughes long term as a starter. Yankees are also in the business of winning a World Series this year in a fiercely competitive division. They have told Hughes that he needs to develop another pitch, a change-up, to be successful as a starter. So Hughes takes that in good faith, and tries to work it in when he is starting in MLB games. He ends up in a situation where his change-up needs more work, so the results are not good at ML level. Say he ends up in a situation like May last year, when his ERA was 6.59, and FIP is 5.85 in a small sample.

The Yankees react to this by putting him in the bullpen, where he has less needs to use all his pitches. So, result-wise, he has a great year, but development-wise, he doesn’t make the desired progress.

The Yankees could alternatively put him in AAA, asking him explicitly to work his change-up in regardless of results, and enforce this by calling his pitches from the dugout. The upside is, it can result in a situation where Hughes works his “work in progress” pitch in a less demanding environment, and if he has good results in minor leagues, he can be called up to try the same against ML hitters. The downside is if the results are bad, then they potentially destroy his confidence, and he becomes a two-pitch pitcher going forward (or three pitch if we say his cut fastball is a good variation from the four-seamer).

The other alternative is for the Yankees to let Hughes take his lumps for more than a month against ML hitters, so that he is more comfortable with that pitch (change-up) against major leaguers. I prefer that alternative, as it gives Hughes some much needed job security to fully develop his craft, and does not make him look beyond his shoulder after every bad outing. But the Yankees being in the business of winning World Series kind of precludes that.

Of these 3, I think it is the middle alternative that probably makes sense for the Yankees.

Just when I had started to get used to the replacement level site… still, hurrah for the old site!

May last year, when his ERA was 6.59, and FIP is 5.85 in a small sample.

you point out sss, but I remember someone looked at his stats without his one brutal start and he was right around average for a starter. The Yankees didn’t move him to the BP for lack of performance, they moved him because they rushed Wang back and needed the spot.

The Yankees didn’t move him to the BP for lack of performance, they moved him because they rushed Wang back and needed the spot.

And why did they feel the need to rush Wang back? Is there any other reason than believing that Wang would provide them with superior performance than what Hughes was providing?

[20] they rushed Wang back because of a possible injury to Joba in a game against the Red Sox.

[21] I don’t quite buy that. They could have simply kept Hughes in the same spot they created for Wang, and waited to see the extent of possible injury on Joba, while keeping Wang in the bullpen. If Joba really was injured, they could have put him in the DL and moved Wang back to rotation in his place.

They replaced Wang and Hughes in their respective roles. I am not seeing anything else here.

[21] It was the Orioles, but your point stands.

And yes, the Yankees are in a bit of a unique environment when it comes to developing young pitching—most teams would not have brought in Vazquez, and Joba and Hughes would be ticketed for the 4/5 slots right now, with Aceves/Mitre/Gaudin/etc as insurance.  But since they’re the Yankees, Home Run Javy is here and one of Joba/Hughes is ticketed for the ‘pen or AAA.

(Of course, I think there’s a non-zero chance that either Pettitte loses it, or someone suffers a long-term injury, and we see a rotation with both Joba and Hughes by July)

[22] I recall that they brought Wang back as a long relief option, because they were worried about burning out the pen with Joba possibly out for an unknown period of time.

(Of course, I think there’s a non-zero chance that either Pettitte loses it, or someone suffers a long-term injury, and we see a rotation with both Joba and Hughes by July)

I think that’s why people are arguing that the “loser” of the 5th starter battle be sent to AAA or act as something besides teh ate pitcher. That way they could take a long term empty spot, or even conceivably grab a spot start or two.

[24] I think we are talking about separate things here. Let’s revisit the history a little bit:

1. Wang started disastrously in ML, and after 3 starts, had an ERA of 34.50. Yankees put him in the DL with a weak hip on April 22. He came off the DL on May 22, would make 3 relief appearances, and was back on rotation on June 4, replacing Hughes.

2. Phil Hughes started in place of Wang, making his first start on April 28. He made his last start on May 31, at which point he had an ERA of 5.45. He was replaced by Wang from June 4.

3. Joba pitched 0.2 innings on May 21 against Baltimore. Yankees brought Wang back in the ML roster the next day as a cover for Chamberlain, but put him in the bullpen. Chamberlain made his next scheduled start on May 26, pitching 4 innings. Wang was not brought back to the rotation at this point.

From the above, I conclude that the Yankees brought Wang back as a cover for Chamberlain at first, as you say, but they did not immediately remove Hughes from the rotation and place Wang in his spot. Rather, they put Wang in the bullpen first, gave Hughes another start, and when the result of the start was not upto the satisfaction of the Yankees (5 IP and 4 ER, burning 95 pitches in the process), they switched the roles of Hughes and Wang.

So my reading is that Hughes was replaced by Wang in the rotation for performance reasons. They could have kept each of them in their respective roles without any roster implications, but chose not to do that.

[26] Wang was brought in as Joba insurance, basically as a replacement starter. Given his problems pitching from the stretch he was never seriously in consideration for a permanent relief position. His return to the ML was to replace Joba if he was injured or Hughes if he was not.

Although it is a relief to be back at what looks like the old site, can I suggest updating the negative comments on the main page. SG, if you don’t get enough amusing hate mail these days I can come up with a few.  Or we could have a contest—contests are fun.Here’s one to get us started.

“replacment level, yea that what this blog is, all numbers to make the yankees look good.  200 million is the only numbe you need, Yanks buy the title! sawx rule on l,ow budget…........”

[26] - But by bringing Wang up to cover for Joba and putting him in the pen there was a fear that he would lose his stretchedoutedness and that’s why there was a seemingly quick hook on Hughes.  After his May 25 start in Texas people wanted to give him more of a shot because he showed something. 

In the end I still thing you are right.  In essence they made the decision to replace Hughes after Joba’s May 21st start.  They just didn’t do it right away because they wanted to see what was going on with Joba and then Hughes threw a gem in Texas.  But at that point Wang was already on the MLB roster and there was no turning back.

Given his problems pitching from the stretch he was never seriously in consideration for a permanent relief position. His return to the ML was to replace Joba if he was injured or Hughes if he was not.

This is an assumption. I have yet to see any evidence that the Yankees used this logic at all. And if that were the case, why not immediately put him back in the rotation on May 31 in place of Hughes after Chamberlain made his start on 26th? Instead, they pitched him at relief on May 26, and on May 31 (in relief of Hughes).

It is also possible that all these were to get his stamina up in preparation for a starting role. But he pitched a complete game shutout for Scranton Wilkes-Barre. It is not that he needed to gradually increase his workload.

I honestly don’t see a credible case that Hughes wasn’t replaced based on a small-sample-sized performance.

Dear God my spelling was never good to begin with but it appears I’ve gotten very lazy with proof reading when we had the ability to edit.

On most other teams, both Hughes and Joba wouldn’t have been this delayed by a win now attitude and they aren’t in this spot right now so that does qualify as being mishandled in my book.

This is both wrong-headed and simply wrong.  They are both where they are now primarily due to the fact that they both got hurt.  The injuries are far more responsible for them being “this delayed” than all other factors combined.

As for the whole Wang to rotation/Hughes to bullpen thing, the problem was a series of unintended consequences that all flowed from the initial bad decision to activate Wang before he’d completed his full 30 days of rehab.  So whether Hughes’ demotion was proximally based on SSS poor performance or something else, without the Chamberlain injury Hughes might well have been still stretched out enough to be a viable candidate to return to the rotation once Wang’s season was done.

This is both wrong-headed and simply wrong.  They are both where they are now primarily due to the fact that they both got hurt.  The injuries are far more responsible for them being “this delayed” than all other factors combined.

Partially.  I still think part of it has been all the bullpen crap.  However almost no other organization gets Javy this off-season.  Maybe the Red Sox.  All other organizations have Hughes and Joba in the rotation and that has nothing to do with injury.

I still think part of it has been all the bullpen crap.

Really the only thing I see as “bullpen crap” could have been bringing Joba up in 2007 in the bullpen.  After that and the success he showed they felt he could handle big league pitchers, but not the innings.  The “plan” was ALWAYS to move him into the starter’s role in 2008, which they did.  And then last year he was a starter, 100% of the time.

All other organizations have Hughes and Joba in the rotation and that has nothing to do with injury.

You sure of that?  There are several organizations that probably would have just put one or both in the bullpen and left it at that.  Sure others would have left them in the rotation, but most of those teams would also have NO CHANCE of winning in 2010.  Or 2011, or 2012.

big league pitchers = big league hitters, obviously.  Igawa could handle the pitchers.

Yay!  Good to see things up and running again, SG.

“Really the only thing I see as “bullpen crap” could have been bringing Joba up in 2007 in the bullpen”

I see Hughes staying in the bullpen instead of going back to the 5th starter when Wang was done for good as much worse.  I also see the Joba as a starter, then a reliever, then a starer thing in 2008 being worse.  I actually don’t have a problem with Joba to the pen in 2007… well, other than the midge game.

You sure of that?  There are several organizations that probably would have just put one or both in the bullpen and left it at that.  Sure others would have left them in the rotation, but most of those teams would also have NO CHANCE of winning in 2010.  Or 2011, or 2012.

Most team, even contenders, operate with a budget.  If they had cost controlled options that had future potential of a Joba and Hughes I can’t see them spending the money to get Javy.  I’d see them using the money to plug a true weakness.  However the Yankees with their mega budget and their ability to put together a team with few real holes is very unique.

I also see the Joba as a starter, then a reliever, then a starer thing in 2008 being worse.

Actually reliever, starter, reliever…and the only reason he went back to the pen is b/c of the month he lost to injury.  But it’s interesting you hated that for Joba but WANTED it for Hughes (starter, reliever, starter).  Sure, I would have rather they just left Hughes in the rotation all year long, but I don’t think it is evidence that they don’t give prospects a chance…

If they had cost controlled options that had future potential of a Joba and Hughes I can’t see them spending the money to get Javy.

Well, that’s specifically Javy.  I’m just claiming that a number of teams may have already moved one of them to the bullpen and may instead be giving McAllister or Nova a chance or something.  And IIRC the Red Sox last year even though they had Buccholz, went before the season and got Smoltz AND Penny.  Even though the situations are a little different - both those guys were rehab cases - it was always known both of them would get a shot in the rotation, and be placed above Buccholz in the pecking order.

But it’s interesting you hated that for Joba but WANTED it for Hughes (starter, reliever, starter).

Joba was in the bullpen for almost 2 months.  Hughes would have been there only a couple of weeks.

And IIRC the Red Sox last year even though they had Buccholz, went before the season and got Smoltz AND Penny.  Even though the situations are a little different - both those guys were rehab cases - it was always known both of them would get a shot in the rotation, and be placed above Buccholz in the pecking order.

Agreed but I did exclude the Red Sox. 

But the Sox did keep Laptop’s MLB experience down.  As of now he still only has 1 year of service time.  And when he wasn’t starting in the majors he was starting in the minors.  The same is true for Lester.

I’m on sd2528 and Sam’s side of this debate, but aside from the Joba/Hughes dispute, I think there’s a very simple way to address this issue…

If you were a minor leaguer (of whatever ability level) trying to break in to the bigs, and all you cared about was breaking in to the bigs and sticking (ie, you care more about your own long-term job security than you do about being a role player on a WS contender), can you honestly say that you would want to be in the Yankees’ organization?

It’s not easy to break in and stick in any organization, but you’re delusional if you think it’s the same in the Yankees organization as it is anywhere else.

Regardless of how much Joba and Hughes’ current situation is a product of injuries and how much a product of organizational handling (both are to blame, I believe), the fact is that the organization isn’t always the kindest to unestablished players.  Ask Mark Melancon how he feels about the Chan Ho Park signing.  And that’s not to say that the Yankees haven’t gotten better about trying to incorporate prospects into their short and long range plans: they have.  But it’s the nature of the Yankees beast that, even when they commit to doing so with two highly touted pitching prospects, they still have a tough time following through on that commitment.

“It’s not easy to break in and stick in any organization, but you’re delusional if you think it’s the same in the Yankees organization as it is anywhere else.”

For the above argument, one needs to separate out the effect of the Yankees having good players at most positions and the effect of the quality of their FO.

[41] Complete agree, Rilke.  You make a good distinction.

Although, arguably, you could say that the need to have good players at most positions has the same, or a similar, net effect as an incompetent FO in terms of prospect development in the bigs.  Which in turn would make it harder to ferret out FO responsibility.  Of course, even if that were the case, you’d still rather have a competent FO running things.

“Which in turn would make it harder to ferret out FO responsibility”

Right, hence my point about the need for separation.

Why does Posada have 3 fewer doubles and three more HR for 2009 at BBRef, MLB.com, and ESPN

Why does Posada have 3 fewer doubles and three more HR for 2009 at BBRef, MLB.com, and ESPN

I should have specified, the 2009 line is for a neutral park/league.  So since DNYS boosted HRs and reduced doubles, Posada’s line reflects that.

Thanks SG.