Jinaz: Is the 2009 Reds opening day outfield worse than last year's?

For the 2008 opening day squad, I have them as -6.1 runs on offense, -6.9 runs in baserunning, and a mind-blowing -41.8 runs in the field for a total production of 55 runs below average.

For the 2009 opening day squad (assuming Dickerson is in LF), I have them as a miserable -33 runs/150g on offense, +8.6 runs/150 g baserunning, and +8 runs per season in the field for a total projected production of 16 runs below average.

I think his methods are a little off, but for what he is trying to show, I think his point still stands. When you look at it across all of the variables, the Reds outfield might actually be improved over the 2008 Opening Day outfield.

8 months ago Slyde 27 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Although you're looking at opening day, what about the entire season..Jerry Hairston Jr. played 53 games in the oufield last season.

He contributed offensively with an OBP over ,400 and an OPS over 900 in over 1/3 of the season as an outfielder. How would this skew the numbers?

What would happen if Gomez and C-Dick platooned…This is a likely scenario,

Why is obc so mean to me when I offer an introduction to a beautiful 25 year old Red's Cheerleader.

by Madville on Mar 17, 2009 9:04 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

yeah

I brought it up in the comments there that Bruce had the 2nd most PAs in the OF last year. I think his point is not to necessarily say the Reds will win 4 more games because of the outfield, rather that this current configuration could outperform last year’s OD configuration despite the fact that it may not look like it on the surface.

"How big IS your magic wand?"

by Slyde on Mar 17, 2009 9:07 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

right

The question here is whether the 2008 OD outfield is better or worse than the 2009 OD squad. I did get a bit sloppy with the run and win values, because everything here was standardized to 150 games. They are accurate, but they only work if you keep in mind that we’re comparing 150 games of performance of the 2008 OD players (playing as they did last year) vs. what we can project the 2009 OD players to do. And that’s getting a bit detached from reality.

The better study would have been to take a couple of different projectable scenarios for the 2009 outfield and compare them to everything that actually happened in the 2008 outfield. I’m sure this would shrink the difference in terms of actual improvement this year. But that would have taken more time, and I didn’ thave time to do this study as it was. :)

But the point remains that our 2009 OD outfield is probably better than our 2008 OD outfield.
-j

On Baseball and the Reds

by JinAZ on Mar 17, 2009 10:55 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

True.

I hate Corey Patterson. There was that guy a couple nights ago who thought that Patterson did not sink the team single-handedly, but sheesh. -38 runs on offense and -1.4 runs on defense?

You could have Bruce in RF, Dickerson in LF and an inanimate carbon rod in CF and probably come up with a better offensive squad than 2009. At least the carbon rod would have a small strike zone and walk a good amount.

And Adam Dunn's spirit, ranging for revenge / With Ate by his side come hot from hell, / Shall in these confines with a monarch's voice / Cry 'Havoc,' and let slip the dogs of war...

by Paul Householder on Mar 17, 2009 10:58 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs

That was extrapolated to 150 g

He was actually “only” -25.5 runs on offense in reality. Still, a replacement player hits 20 runs below average over an entire season, and Patterson “topped” that in just shy of 400 PA’s.

Fielding-wise, we should probably give him a bump because he was playing CF, which puts him on the positive side of the ledger. He’s a good fielder.

But yeah, really, really bad season. Way below what he was projected to do. I actually thought he was a good signing given the money and projected performance. He just massively, massively underperformed.

On Baseball and the Reds

by JinAZ on Mar 17, 2009 12:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

You had me...until you said that it was a good signing given the money.

IIRC, Corey was signed for $3M + incentives. That sounds to me like a horrible signing cost-wise.

But it begs the question: Who had the worse season…CoPat, or Dusty for giving him 392 PA’s? I know we had a lot of injuries…but not enough to justify starting an offensively incompetent underachiever in a season that, in many ways, became a steady stream of shitburgers and lies.

It's all fun and games until someone gets herpes. - Fox 4 News

by PeteyHendrix on Mar 18, 2009 2:35 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Wow...

-41.8 runs for fielding?

I wonder whether the annualized 42 extra runs for the opposition has skewed people’s perceptions of GABP even more towards thinking it is a hitters’ paradise.

The actual stats probably control for bad fielding, but still. That’s a lot of runs and a lot of pythagorean wins.

And Adam Dunn's spirit, ranging for revenge / With Ate by his side come hot from hell, / Shall in these confines with a monarch's voice / Cry 'Havoc,' and let slip the dogs of war...

by Paul Householder on Mar 17, 2009 10:32 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

fielding

The fielding numbers are extrapolated to a full season. But yeah, lousy defense (pitching + hitting) and until recently excellent home offense are a big part of the reason for the high scoring games at GABP. I always used to cringe when Hal would report how GABP ranked in terms of overall runs scored as evidence that it’s a hitter’s park.

The way the park factors are calculated though, is by comparing Reds home performances vs. Reds away performances. Therefore, because the Reds have taken their good offenses and lousy defenses with them on the road over the pats 5 years, it shouldn’t impact the estimates too much. The best, regressed estimate I’ve seen of GABP’s park factor is 1.02, meaning that run scoring is amplified about 2%. That makes it a moderate hitter’s park, but not quite to the level of Coors’ or Arlington.
-j

On Baseball and the Reds

by JinAZ on Mar 17, 2009 10:49 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

That park factor sounds about like Miller Park which is occasionally referred to as a “band box” although not with the regularity that GABP is.

by ol Pete on Mar 17, 2009 11:40 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Lets not forget....

Griffey was historically bad in the field last year.

I agree, Paul. I believe the Red’s terrible pitching and defense in the last 6 years has skewed the perception of GAPB as such a hitter’s park.

by nycredsfan on Mar 17, 2009 10:38 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

second'd

My millions are unconventional!

by Charlie Scrabbles on Mar 17, 2009 10:44 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Oh and...

Do not underestimate the Corey Patterson effect.

In trying to figure out why an outfield of Dunn, Griffey and Bruce would be 6.1 runs below average, I had forgotten that Dustbrain installed his butt-buddy as the Opening Day center fielder. Justin has him there, in all of his glory, together with his -38.4 runs on offense and -1.4 runs on defense. I’m actually surprised that he contributed +1.0 runs for baserunning, since he got on base so infrequently.

And Adam Dunn's spirit, ranging for revenge / With Ate by his side come hot from hell, / Shall in these confines with a monarch's voice / Cry 'Havoc,' and let slip the dogs of war...

by Paul Householder on Mar 17, 2009 10:48 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

If only.....

we had an outfield of Dunn, Taveras/Dickerson, and Bruce.

That might have a chance of being a real major league outfield.

by nycredsfan on Mar 17, 2009 10:50 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Park Factors

If you look at the park factors (which admittedly fluctuate pretty wildly), GABP isn’t so much a hitters park as it is a homers park.

Hits and doubles have always fluctuated between just above average and just below average, while triples are way, way, way, below average. Homers are way above average in pretty much every year. Overall, it leads to GABP being a hitters park, but not as extreme as the media makes it out to be, and the hitters tilt is almost entirely due to homers, not to preventable plays like hits and doubles.

by teb7 on Mar 17, 2009 12:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

how much of that has to with the Reds having had some pretty powerful lineups

and terrible pitching since they moved in?

"Oedipus ruined a great sex life by asking too many questions!"- Dr. Stephen T. Colbert DFA.

by justin007000 on Mar 17, 2009 12:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

park factors are calculated relative to how a team and their opponents hit at home vs on the road

so it doesn’t matter what style of lineup they have. If they had a team that only hit 20 home runs a year and only gave up 10, but 25 of those 30 HRs were hit at GABP, GABP would still be considered a HR ballpark.

"How big IS your magic wand?"

by Slyde on Mar 17, 2009 1:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

So basically, Justin statistically proved

that Corey Patterson should’ve had the Requiem for a Dream song for his at-bat music, and the PA should’ve played the Yackety Sax everytime a ball was hit to the outfield.

...because there's already someone posing as Jacob Brumfield

by Cy Schourek on Mar 17, 2009 10:53 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I dunno...

There are about a gazillions caveats in this analysis:

1. You’re using the projection of the OD OF in ‘09. No one would have projected Patterson, in his age 28 season, to lose half of the offensive ability he’d shown the previous two years. ZiPS (which seems about as accurate as the rest, and previous year projections are easily available) projected Patterson at a .697 OPS over 495 AB while stealing 32 bases at an 82% clip; his actual numbers were a .582 OPS over 366 AB with 16 SB at a 60% clip. Using this completely unexpected level of suckitude, then adding another third of a season of it (“per 150 games”), severely skews things.

2. If Dickerson is the opening day starter in LF, it will likely only be because of the handedness of the opposing pitcher. A more complete picture would be to include Gomes’ anticipated addition to the lineup.

3. Slyde noted that Bruce actually had the 2nd most PAs in last year’s outfield, and should be included in your analysis, but I’d go one step further: by opening day, everyone expected that Bruce would have significant playing time at the expense of (largely) Jr. and (some) Patterson, while right now everyone assumes the OF will consist (barring injury) of CDick/Gomes/Tavares/Bruce all year. The addition of Bruce to the outfield last year significantly changed the production in all three phases of the game you’re studying.

4. The baserunning projection for Tavares (average of 2007 & 2008 stats/150 g for Taveras) should be taken with a grain of salt, in my opinion. In ’08, he stole 62 bases (twice as many as any other year) at a 90% clip (12%higher than his career average going into last season).

Everyone expected the ‘08 outfield to be much better than it was: While no one thought he’d be a star, Patterson was supposed to hit and run much better than he did, and then was given too many ABs as a terrible hitter; as stated, Jr. was historically bad on defense. You then compound this by extrapolating Patterson’s offense and baserunning, and Jr.‘s defense, giving them much more weight than they actually had (and in Jr’s case, even more than anyone expected it to have) and completely ignoring Bruce. Also, leaving Gomes out of the analysis (when it’s obvious he’s going to get significant playing time, negating at least some of the defensive and baserunning advantages to this year’s club), skews the results. Finally, it’s as easy to see Tavares putting up Patterson-like numbers on offense (his OPS last year was only .604) as the .669 projected.

While the data may not be easily available, a better analysis would be “can we expect the outfield to be better than what we expeced on OD ‘08, assuming playing time for Bruce (’08) and Gomes(’09)?”. It certainly wouldn’t show the gap your current analysis does, and might even reverse the findings.

Often wrong, never uncertain.

by sidnancy on Mar 17, 2009 1:42 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

really?

It certainly wouldn’t show the gap your current analysis does, and might even reverse the findings.

I wouldn’t be surprised to see the findings change. But even so, we’re replacing 300-some PA’s from a replacement player in Griffey and 400-some PA’s from a sub-replacement player in Patterson. All of the projectable outfielders are above replacement level, and Bruce is close to Dunn in value. I think the finding will stand.

Unfortunately, I don’t have time to do it. But be my guest…
-j

On Baseball and the Reds

by JinAZ on Mar 17, 2009 2:28 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

that first line should be italicized. Ah well.

n/t

On Baseball and the Reds

by JinAZ on Mar 17, 2009 2:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

You're missing my point, I think

we’re replacing 300-some PA’s from a replacement player in Griffey

But you’re showing Griffey’s value last season as “per 150 G”, which is going to almost double his effect on the numbers from last year. He also projected as .826 OPS but only hit .787 as a Red. Further, Bruce projected close offensively last year (.793) to what he produced (.767), but was not included.

and 400-some PA’s from a sub-replacement player in Patterson. All of the projectable outfielders are above replacement level

Patterson’s offense (.697 OPS, 32/7 SB/CS per ZiPS) last year projected as better than Tavares’ (.647 OPS, 48/10 SB/CS) projects this year. If Tavares projects as “above replacement level” this year, certainly Patterson did last year.

There is no doubt that the Reds’ OF was a disappointment last year. However,

No one could have imagined Patterson would be so bad;
Most people/everyone assumed Bruce would get significant playing time last year;
Everyone assumes Gomes will get significant playing time this year.
Looking at fangraphs, you’re accepting that Tavares will defend about 10 R/150 G better than he has either of the past two years, and comparing him to a year Patterson was 10 R worse than his career average.

I guess the short version of what I’m saying is this: You’re taking the worst of last year’s performance (while ignoring significant contributions by Bruce, Dickerson, and Hairston) and multiplying it out to a level of playing time that wasn’t anywhere near what we saw, and comparing it to the best likely performers this coming season. I just think you’re leaving too much info out when you’re comparing the teams this way.

Often wrong, never uncertain.

by sidnancy on Mar 17, 2009 4:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

These are the numbers I get

I left a couple players out- but this should be pretty close to the 08 outfield performance and as Sid said the substitutes(Dickerson and Hairston) definitely improved the overall OF performance.

RF Griffey about 60% of the playing time/ Bruce 40%. Griffey -20 defense/ +3 offense. Bruce was actually pretty poor defensively in right(albiet very small sample size) -15 defense 0 offensive.
RF was basically around -15 runs.

CF Patterson 65/Bruce 20/ Hairston 10%. Corey -25 offense/ 0 defense; Bruce 15 defense/ 0 offense(Bruce admitted how much he preferred playing in CF which did reflect in the numbers) Hairston14 offense/ defense n/a.
So the addition of Bruce and Hairston brought the CF number down to -10.

LF Dunn(70) Dickerson(30)- Dunn+30 offense -22 Defense/ Dickerson +10 offense/ 0 defense(Hairston numbers were similar so I just engulfed them into Dickerson’s starts).
LF +10. Total OF 2008 -15. This seems like a more realistic number.
As far as 2009. I would project Bruce 0 offense/ +5 Defense. It would be a crime if Jay isnt a plus defensive corner OF.

LF platoon Dickerson/ Gomes. Dickerson averaging out the 5 projections on fangraphs comes out +2 offense. Chris was +6 defensively for the year in all OF play. I think its safe to say he should be a solid +5-10 defender. With the platoon hopefully it doesnt reduce the overall value of just playing Chris Full time. But with the uncertainity lets say LF +5.

Now CF- Taveras averages out with a -12 offense of the projection systems. Defense is a question mark. He was a +15 defender in Houston/ -8 defender in Colorado. I would split the difference and say he is average and you get a -12 number for CF. Total outfield 2009 -2 runs for a one game improvement over 2008.

I think there is more room for upside surprise than downside- with Jay’s bat and hopefully Willie is at least a plus defender. If I had to guess I would say the 2009 OF will be about 20 runs better than 08.

by davidmac84 on Mar 17, 2009 5:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

20 runs better...hmmmm

Let’s save this post and review it in October…I’d love to see who is closest in their projections.

Why is obc so mean to me when I offer an introduction to a beautiful 25 year old Red's Cheerleader.

by Madville on Mar 17, 2009 10:25 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

could be even better

but part of the problem is public fielding stats just are not precise enough to do these type of calculations. For instance I have a hard time believing Willie Taveras using Fangraph’s measure went from close to a gold glove OF with Houston to a bottom 5 CF with Colorado.
But this is my personal projections. On offense I think Bill James system is the best approximation of the Reds OF ie he’s bullish on Bruce and Dickerson and has the most negative projection on Taveras(-20 runs).
With Taveras when you have no ability to drive the ball or draw walks- when your offense relies in an extreme fashion on infield hits- I just dont see that has sustainable even at a replacement level. I see Taveras -25 exactly the same as Patterson but I do see him as closer to the Houston Defense so call him +10 in the field.
James as Bruce at +18 offense/lets round it down to +15 . I see him also has at least +5 defense.
LF Dickerson/Gomes. James has Dickerson +9 offense. In a platoon this should rise to +10 and cut the playing time by 70%. Gomes average offensive projection is around +5. In a platoon and also moving to an easier league and better park that number should be higher lets say +8. Gomes defense seems to be pretty much the same as Dunn while Dickerson I would expect to be one of the top Defensive LFs. Lets say Dickerson +10 and Gomes -20. Gomes takes the defense down to +1/ lets call the offense +8.

So putting it together. RF Bruce breaks out and is a huge upgrage over Bruce/Griffey RF to the tune of plus 35 runs. CF the Reds are actually 5 runs worse. LF the Reds with Gomes and Dickerson are the same as Dunn/Dickerson.
So the Reds are 3 games better in the OF even with another -25 run offensive CF.

by davidmac84 on Mar 18, 2009 12:30 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I think UZR has problem with the Rockies CF

I have no science to back that up, but I’m suspicious that their numbers are accurate. I’m similarly suspicious of Minute Maid Park too, so I think Taveras may be more slightly better than average than at either extreme that we see from those parks. Defensive stats are notoriously bad with CF because of a variety of reasons that have little to do with talent.

"How big IS your magic wand?"

by Slyde on Mar 18, 2009 8:37 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Speaking of Coors...

Take a look at Brad Hawpe. Fangraphs UZR/150 claims him to be a -47.9 Run fielder in RF for 2008. That’s despite the fact that THT is showing Hawpe with only 187 Ball in Zone (BIZ) chances and 161 BIZ plays. Now, Hawpe did produce about half the rate of OOZ Plays as your average MLB RF qualifier, but even extrapolated to 150 games, he’s “missing” about 28 OOZ Plays. Color me skeptical about the actual value of those OOZ Plays as they are, by definition, balls he cannot reasonably be expected to field.

Hawpe isn’t a good fielder, but per 150 games, he’s only 31 BIZ plays from being perfect in his Zone and only 28 OOZ Plays from being average in that area. In short, there’s no possible way that Brad Hawpe missed enough plays to produce a negative Run value of -49.7 over 150 games. Well, unless “reasonable expectation” for him includes turning HR balls into Outs from the RF stands…but I digress. Are we really to believe that replacing Brad Hawpe circa 2008 with the same bat and Carl Crawford-level defense in RF would have virtually wiped away the Rockies’ 2008 negative Run Diff? Not speaking to anyone in particular, but those are the kind of questions folks need to start asking themselves before simply glomming on to defensive Run values that rightfully should be looked at with a huge ol’ block of salt before being used in any comparative analysis.

by SteelSD on Mar 18, 2009 2:46 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

this is way too technical for me

All know is that no one will match Dunn in Home run production or OBP, or walks (Bruce might get into the mid 30’s and will be around 90-100 RBI) and everyone (CDick, NoHo, Havoc, and even Stubbs) will out perform CoPa. The rest of the numbers make my head spin.

Also, Anyone know a way to track the most bunt/infield hits/attempts in a game? Because the first time we see Havoc and NoHo in the same starting lineup watch out!

90 wins in 09!!

by Caleb on Mar 20, 2009 8:50 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs