Cubs Series Preview
The Cubs return to Great American Ballpark riding a 6-game losing streak, most recently at the hands of the division-leading St. Louis Cardinals. This should be a very winnable series for the Reds. The Cubs are a below-average hitting team, with terrible baserunning and fielding, and the worst starting pitching in baseball (by results, anyway...and the Reds do face their two best pitchers). Their one "strength" on the team is their bullpen, but even that is pretty thin after their two studs.
The Reds, on the other hand, are coming off a tough beating at the hands of the Dodgers over the last few days. The offense continues to rate well in its raw numbers, and don't be deceived by the 101 wRC+: that number is 3rd in the NL, after park adjustments (they're also 2nd in OPS+ at 102). Their fielding is also top notch, so what's holding them back is their pitching. The starters continue to have better peripherals than results, while the bullpen flips that trend. if anything, the pattern we see with the bullpen is what we'd expect for the staff as a whole, as the fielding should push the numbers that direction. No such luck, at least not so far...
Probable Pitchers
Matt Garza's start is his return from the DL after an other-wordly initial 55 innings in the National League. The guy was just unreal before going on the DL, so I can only hope he feels a bit rusy.
While not official, Tuesday is likely the return of Edinson Volquez vs. Doug Davis. xFIP says that's the best matchup for the Reds. I dunno...I'm not particularly concerned with Doug Davis, but Volquez's walk rate scares me despite the fabulous k-rate and ground ball rate. His last AAA start didn't do much to belay my fears either (4 bb and 2 k's), despite the nice result.
Ryan Dempster has had a horrendous start to the season, but I don't see anything wrong with his underlying numbers--beyond the .330 BABIP, a 64% LOB% and a 17% HR/FB ratio.
Bullpen
Carlos Marmol strikes a ridiculous number of hitters out, but also walks a ton and gives up enough fly balls that you'd expect that he'd be susceptible to the home run. And Sean Marshall has unquestionably been a stud, and will probably be brought out to pitch to Votto and Bruce in every close game this series. But outside of that, there's not much to fear in this pen. Kerry Wood's also a setup guy, but he hasn't been as impressive as his 2.35 ERA would indicate this season.
There is one interesting quirk to the Cubs' pen: right now, they have more lefties than righties. You won't see that very often, and it could present an opportunity for guys like Stubbs, Phillips, and Rolen in the late innings.
Position Players
Not that this offense was likely to be well above average anyway, but the Cubs have been hit hard by injuries. They've lost their left fielder (Alfonso Soriano) and center fielder (Marlon Byrd), and two important bench bats in Jeff Baker and Reed Johnson. The Cubs have a clear advantage at SS with Castro, and possibly left field (though that's more by default than anything), but otherwise I like the Reds a lot here. The Cubs' best hitter thus far has been Kosuke Fukudome, who has good on-base skills but not much else. Carlos Pena is their main surviving power threat--I think he'll end up with a season better than last year's, though probably not quite to 2009 levels.
For the Reds...good hitting overall, but I'm starting to really worry about shortstop and also a bit about left field. I'm getting very interested in Zach Cozart and Yonder Alonso...and Chris Heisey, for that matter.
43 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I'm new to a lot of these statistics
What are HR/FB and xFIP?
I don’t know what any of those hitting stats are either, but I figure I should pace myself. I think baseball statistics could be a legit academic major.
by Palace of the Fans on Jun 6, 2011 2:18 PM EDT reply actions
They certainly could be a legit academic major...
I’ll let someone else fill in the details for you, but I’ll offer up that when I was learning about the advanced baseball statistics, I found the hitting stats to be easier to digest. If you’ve got an interest in getting into the advanced stats, I recommend reading The Book by Tom Tango and checking out the sabermetric library at fangraphs.com.
These tables remind me of kenpom.com
which is the college basketball statistics heaven.
I’m just happy all these stats exist, whether I know what they mean or not.
by Palace of the Fans on Jun 6, 2011 2:44 PM EDT up reply actions
HR/FB is HR per fly ball
it tells you how often a pitchers fly balls are going out of the stadium for home runs, so lower is better.
xFIP is not something that is just explained with a sentence, but it works the same as ERA. It is also not the same as xFLIP, which you might see around here…
That's what I was guessing
but then I saw a 40% and thought that would be impossible. But with only 7 inning pitched I guess anything is possible.
I have some reading to do.
by Palace of the Fans on Jun 6, 2011 2:32 PM EDT up reply actions
Oh wow, you're right
but look at the dude’s ERA. Yeah, you can see some crazy numbers in a sample of 7 innings. Just look at Bronson’s last two starts…
xFIP and HR/fb
XFIP is an estimated ERA based on strikeout, walk, and outfield fly ball rates. Beyond getting “rid” of anything that involves fielders (and thus things dependent on teammates), xFIP is a better predictor of future ERA than ERA itself. Therefore, I just it as an indication of how well pitchers are throwing, whereas ERA is more a record of what happens.
HR/FB is as described above by kc. Interestingly, pitchers differ very little in repeatable skill in preventing home runs per fly ball. League average is ~9% right now, so if someone is way over that now you’ll expect it to decline, all else being equal.
As with everything, no stat is perfect. But they are useful ways to look at pitcher skill.
The saber library is a great resource, and The Book is great. I also highly recommend a book by Lee Panas that is published on lulu that steps through virtually all useful stars and explains what they are, how they work, and how to use them.
Also, I’m happy to answer questions on this stuff, so feel free to come back for more!
-j
I write at:
RotoGraphs | Red Reporter | Basement-Dwellers.com | Twitter: @jinazreds
by JinAZ on Jun 6, 2011 2:43 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Thanks, man
I now have a slightly better understanding than green=good. I have much to learn.
by Palace of the Fans on Jun 6, 2011 2:49 PM EDT up reply actions
"useful stars" = "useful stats"
I’m even more typo prone on the iPhone than usual!
I write at:
RotoGraphs | Red Reporter | Basement-Dwellers.com | Twitter: @jinazreds
by JinAZ on Jun 6, 2011 2:50 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
the problem with advanced statistics is
new ones come out & get used as if they’re gospel & then about 6 month to a year later someone comes along & proves that the stat is either inaccurate or worthless.
I get your point, but this isn't really true/fair
I agree that a lot people (myself included sometimes) use new stats as if they are the be all/end all when they shouldn’t.
But a lot of this stuff (xFIP, BABIP, HR/FB, etc) has been understood and used in the same way for a while now. You can’t really just denounce all of it with a wave of your hand.
*Note: I realize this post probably lowers my xFLiP to record low levels.
Billy Hamilton: Snax
Devin Mesoraco: Snacks
not at all
it just seems that when i follow along arguments between people using stats, they are always quick to discredit the stat the other person is using.
a lot of the fielding metrics spring to mind as stats that some use & others seem to think are garbage
by 'tHan on Jun 6, 2011 2:58 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
I think most folks around here recognize that there's still a lot uncertainty with fielding stats
And really, before UZR I don’t remember much discussion of fielding stats at all.
by ken on Jun 6, 2011 3:11 PM EDT up reply actions
Fielding
Is a place where we’ve had a major reevaluation over the past year or so. There were far bigger problems with those data than anyone realized. That said, I also think the zeal with which things like UZR have been trashed by some is an overreaction to the new findings. It’s still useful, though more so at the season/several season level than the career level.
There’s no perfect solution, so I report several stats for fielding. Ideally, they all will tell the same story! :) -j
I write at:
RotoGraphs | Red Reporter | Basement-Dwellers.com | Twitter: @jinazreds
by JinAZ on Jun 6, 2011 3:11 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
I agree
I think I could learn more from watching a player or pitcher in a few at-bats than I could from all the statistics in the world. But they’re certianly useful for putting conceps into written form and summarizing past results.
by Palace of the Fans on Jun 6, 2011 2:56 PM EDT up reply actions
Maybe you can
But I certainly cannot. I remember thinking Bruce was hopeless as a hitter based on a week early this season when they were killing him with down-in breaking balls. Obviously, he’s having a decent little season. :).
Baseball is a sport that has a lot of randomness and in-season (or in-game) adjustments. It really requires longer views to appreciate player skill (at least for most of us), and humans are pretty bad at taking the long view. Fortunately, we have lots of tools now to help us reconcile what we see with our eyes with what is actually happening in the long term. -j
I write at:
RotoGraphs | Red Reporter | Basement-Dwellers.com | Twitter: @jinazreds
by JinAZ on Jun 6, 2011 3:05 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Those adjustments are why I prefer to trust my eyes over numbers
Bruce is a young player who can be taken advantage of by smart pitchers. His success depends on how well he adjusts to what strategies pitchers use against him. Stats may be a good measure of skill, but baseball is largely a mind game if most players are comparable in skill level (like in the majors).
That said, as an ex-pitcher, I am always thinking along with the pitcher during games. I feel like I could shut down the Reds lineup if I had major league stuff because I watch every game and I know the batters’ tendencies. Likewise if I were a hitter facing a Reds pitcher I would be able to think along with him generally and know what to expect.
I just don’t see statistics being able to meaningfully impact the game on a microscopic level (within an at-bat), but on a macroscopic level (matchups, fielding alignments), I can understand their usefullness.
by Palace of the Fans on Jun 6, 2011 3:18 PM EDT up reply actions
The problem with this is that a single at bat is, by definition, fluky
And people with an attitude like yours tend to place undue importance on a single play or at bat that sticks in their mind.
I might have it in my head that Bruce can’t hit balls down and in for example, or that Votto never hits it the other way, or that Paul Janish hasn’t hit a ball out of the infield all season. Stats are an objective way to tell me if I’m full of shit.
Also, knowing batters’ tendencies from watching isn’t incompatible with stats. The stats are explaining what a batter tends to do as well. As does Pitch F/X data and a whole mess of other stuff.
Ideally they work together, but it’s folly to assume you can tell everything and more that stats give you ONLY by watching a player play.
Billy Hamilton: Snax
Devin Mesoraco: Snacks
It depends on how the stats are being used
It pisses me off when a manager puts on a severe infield shift angainst a left-handed batter only to have the pitcher pump fastballs over the outside corner. In that situation, the micro pitching strategy should trump the long-term statistical averages.
Also, I think you’re confusing my attitude with someone who thinks a pitch was bad just because it ended up being hit for a single. I put more importance on approach than outcome. How long a hitter’s swing and stride are, how early he gives up on certain pitches, where his front foot lands on certain pitches, how he keeps his hands tight on inside pitches, how hard he swings in different counts. I prefer qualitative knowledge of these things over numbers within an at-bat.
by Palace of the Fans on Jun 6, 2011 4:18 PM EDT up reply actions
The only stat that matters to me is ...
The CQ … or Clutchiness Quotient.
Ranging from 1-5, the variables are dependent on the inning, the position and the desired effect. It can be defensive but mostly, it’s the most offensive stat I can offer on this board.
Right now, RayMoan leads in the CQ with a 3.41, which is why they call him CMM.
Gomes is right at 1.00, up or down depending on the pitcher.
As for our hurlers, Cordero is a 4.00 … mainly because he hasn’t gotten shelled in the last week and a half.
The baby under the basket is a very powerful talisman, only to be used in times of great distress.
that's basically the premise
of Stumbling On Wins. The authors argue that it’s simply impossible for even the smartest person to keep track of everything that affects performance. But people tend to think they can – especially “experts” like GMs. Just like 90% of us think we’re better than average drivers.
All Things Bubba: Because how can you not love a baseball player named Bubba?
I'm a terrible driver, and I believe the ball sounds different off some people's bats
"Wait, you think I'm being mean to the pretend orangutan?" -- battlekow
so, you're in the 10%, eh?
All Things Bubba: Because how can you not love a baseball player named Bubba?
I've always been in the higher percentiles!
"Wait, you think I'm being mean to the pretend orangutan?" -- battlekow
I agree with both statements.
Even though I’ve never seen you drive, and I don’t think the sound of the ball matters much.
Billy Hamilton: Snax
Devin Mesoraco: Snacks
I see we're in the honeymoon phase
"Wait, you think I'm being mean to the pretend orangutan?" -- battlekow
My thoughts on the matter.
Personal observation and statistical analysis both are very valuable. They should both have a place in the game and I think we arrive at our best results when they’re used together, whether that’s done by one person using both the sets of data, or like we see here- and what I like better, where two people look at something with two different sets of data. An example being Justin’s work on the starting pitching that he did at the beginning of the year where he got a lot of input from Mike Fast (If I remember correctly). Getting the two different viewpoints on it can let a fan kind of reconcile the differences and arrive at a conclusion based on both sets.
We can’t depend one hundred percent on statistics, because baseball is played by people, not robots and obviously adjustments are made. In the same way, we can’t depend completely on observation either.
/rambling done
"People don't kill people. Burning oreo packages kill people."
Progress = change
I try not to use anything as gospel. But I do try to use the best available tool(s) to learn about players and teams, and they do change as we learn/test/reevaluate. Usually, the newer stuff converges on the same answers as before. But sometimes, the new stuff gives us different, better info. -j
I write at:
RotoGraphs | Red Reporter | Basement-Dwellers.com | Twitter: @jinazreds
by JinAZ on Jun 6, 2011 2:57 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
It does when we've found problems with what we were doing
At least then we know what we were doing was “wrong” (and hopefully why it was wrong!). We might not know the right answer, but we’re better off than before.
-j
I write at:
RotoGraphs | Red Reporter | Basement-Dwellers.com | Twitter: @jinazreds
by JinAZ on Jun 6, 2011 3:14 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Yeah, their pitching may only be a tick below avg
Harry Pavalis’s (a saber-Cubs fan) complaints about balls being tossed into dugouts have become a minor theme on twitter.
I write at:
RotoGraphs | Red Reporter | Basement-Dwellers.com | Twitter: @jinazreds
by JinAZ on Jun 6, 2011 2:47 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Glad we get to skip Zambrano
If you didn’t see his quotes after the bullpen blew another game for him, they’re in the Big League Stew article on the sidebar.
I'd much rather see Zambrano than Garza.
This is probably the navel-gazing fan in me, but it seems like the Reds are catching every team’s top 2-3 starters in every series lately.
Billy Hamilton: Snax
Devin Mesoraco: Snacks
Garza vs. Leake looks like mismatch
Hopefully the putrid defense will even things up.
All Things Bubba: Because how can you not love a baseball player named Bubba?
Baseball happens
So you never know. Garza wasn’t this good in past seasons, so you don’t know if he’ll carry it forward at that level. -j
I write at:
RotoGraphs | Red Reporter | Basement-Dwellers.com | Twitter: @jinazreds
by JinAZ on Jun 6, 2011 3:16 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Also, rustiness like you said.
That’s what I’m hanging my hat on tonight, especially with the terrible lineup they are fielding.
Billy Hamilton: Snax
Devin Mesoraco: Snacks
it concerns me
Garza actually didn’t give up too many hits last time he was just victimized by teh terrible defense. I hope the offense figures him out this time and we don’t need the defense’s help. Or if we get their help, it just adds to an already comfortable lead






























