Skill or "Energy"
Bernie, Bernie, Bernie. The Chinese need energy to continue economic growth. Busch Stadium needs energy to light the stadium, keep the Budweiser cold, and light the Stan Musial statue. The City of St. Louis needs energy to run traffic lights, street lamps, provide electricity. The St. Louis Cardinals Baseball Club, though, does not need energy.
Sitting at the Par Lounge, Bernie could have written an intelligent, researched post about how the Cardinals squandered good pitching performances, how they aren't getting guys on-base, how they are not being patient at the plate, how Pujols being out amplifies the black hole in offensive production that is our middle infield, or some other poignant subject. Of course, Bernie didn't do that. Instead he embarked on the worst kind of sports writing, a column on the stuff of myth and lore--in this case, it's "energy."
Bernie states that the Cardinals need to "energize" their attack, by playing Barton and Ryan more as well as by calling up Memphis Redbirds (apparently because AAA players have more "energy"). Admittedly, since greenies were banned, teams seem a little lethargic. The chocolate-covered espresso beans from Starbucks don't seem to be doing the trick. The problem is that we are swinging more, taking fewer pitches, and walking less. Surely, taking a pitch is the least energetic endeavor in baseball, followed by its derivative--the walk. As LB chronicled in a post that was everything Bernie's is not, this is the problem of our beloved Redbirds since Pujols went down.
I don't think that Cesar Izturis's inability to hit is due to a lack of energy, nor do I think that Kennedy's incredibly slow bat speed is because his energy cells are running low. And, anyone will tell you that Aaron Miles always puts forth 117% in his grit-filled efforts. But energetic scrappiness doesn't mean that Miles should play over Ryan, either. Brendan Ryan should be getting more ABs because Izturis and Kennedy just aren't that good.
The Real Izturis has stood up. It has nothing to do with energy and everything to do with skill, or a lack thereof. An inflated OBP in the early going has fallen to normal and expected levels. And an inflated OPS, especially after his lone HR, has similarly sank like a stone cast into the sea. His BA is also bad. He is not good enough to be penciled into a big league lineup for a team striving to play in October. For the year, Izturis is batting .241/.315/.313, for a horrid .628 OPS that ranks him 20th out of 21 big leaguers with at least 200 PAs as a shortstop. Point blank, Cesar Izturis should not be allowed to dig into a Major League batter's box.
Adam Kennedy has proven himself washed up as well. The question of whether or not Kennedy would be able to rebound from his horrendous 2007 season after surgery has been resoundingly answered in the negative. His slapping weakly proved lucky early this season, but has since evened out, exposing him as a subpar player not fit to button a jersey with Cardinals-on-bat (and, probably not even with a Redbird-on-Memphis). AK's .258 BA might not be unbearable if his OBP weren't worse than even Izturis at .308. To make matters worse, he is slugging only .304 (and that's in the wake of his only HR of the season). All of this makes for an OPS of .637, which is bad for 22nd out of 24 secondbasemen with at least 175 PAs. Kennedy is the new Junior Spivey and should be dealt with accordingly.
Even after today's very good performance, Aaron Miles is on the fringe of being a legitimate big leaguer. He certainly is not good enough defensively to have played SS as much as he has this season. Even one inning is too much. His high BA, for him, of .293 has bolstered his marginal .333 OBP, and today's blasts have propped up a nonexistent slugging percentage. Nonetheless his OPS of .681 is not good and intolerable with the black hole at SS.
I'm not at all stating that Brendan Ryan has been setting the park ablaze with his hitting. That said, in his relatively few ABs, he has hit .276/.321/.314, for an OPS of .636, which sucks. But, last season he put up an OPS of .753 and he did have the best Spring Training of our quartet of slappy middle infielders. He has played a solid defense in his limited playing time, as well, showing good range. It would do the Cards well to see what Ryan can do since it cannot conceivably be worse than Izturis and Kennedy. That way, we know how badly we need to target a middle infielder come the deadline.
What the Cardinals need in the wake of Pujols' injury is not energy, but baserunners and power. In the K.C. sweep, we managed a mere .224 OBP. We also slugged four XBH, one of which was a solo Ankiel homer. With no one on the basepaths and no one driving the ball, runs were not scored. Luckily, power was to be had from some unlikely sources between the hallowed foul lines of Fenway. LaRue, Skippy, and Yadi all homered in Game 1, a game in which we had 13 baserunners. (I tried to calculate the odds of these three all homering in the same game, but my head nearly exploded, so I stopped for safety's sake.) In Game 2, Miles whacked one, as did the sluggers Glaus and Ankiel. We had 17 baserunners in the game.
I paid close attention during these games and I didn't see any great energy differential. I didn't a radiant glow from the Cardinal dugout in Fenway. Nor did anyone seem to be playing harder in Boston than in St. Louis vs. the Royals. The played with the energy that professional ballplayers intent on winning play with--both in St. Louis vs. K.C. and in Boston vs. the Sox.
24 comments
|
3 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Funny you say that about Izturis
I was waiting for the monthly argument that Izturis is awesome by CardsWin, but I guess that’s why he hasn’t posted.
Can we please start to search the trading block? We need to upgrade this middle infield. I’m not too familiar with win shares, but I don’t see how that can’t give us a boost.
On with the (good) youth movement!
Well if Cardswin
is not around, I’ll just speak for him. If you can’t see that Izturis save our ass about twice a game with plays deep in the hole that only a few shortstops can make, then I don’t know what game you are watching. If you need hitting, find it somewhere else. Ryan should be proving his worth at 2nd. If he can’t cut it, then find a 2nd baseman that can. Izturis is a must for his defense. If he can stay above the Mendoza line, he’s worth his pay.
I disagree
Izturis does make great plays, but there are several shortstops out there who can make great plays while hitting well, too. Or even hit decently . . .
If we had Chase Utley at second base then we could get away with having Iz at SS, but we don’t. We need to get a better hitter at one of our MI positions and as far as I’m concerned, they’re both totally upgradable.
On with the (good) youth movement!
You said it
we need an upgrade at one of MI positions. Concentrate on 2b with the highest upgrade possible upgrade. Trying to upgrade both would not be practable as for as cost IMHO. I’m just saying leave Isturis there for his defense.
I loved your post
- specifically, (even without the numbers… just using my EYES) I can scarcely think of a weaker or sillier looking slap hitter than Kennedy and Itzturis. My one and only candidate is Juan Pierre, but at least HE has speed, and seemingly a good eye at the plate.
Probably, a below average batting eye
This is tough for me because I truly respect Juan Pierre’s professionalism and work ethic, but his career OBP of .347 is propped up by high batting averages. What’s more, the last five years have exposed an inability to get on base at a decdent rate. As his hitting skill has declined, his OBP has followed, making him a marginal leadoff man. From 2005 on, Pierre has hit sub-.300 and had an OBP of .333 or lower. He just doesn’t walk enough (only 17 so far this year and 33 last year). He does have speed, but his less than mediocre ability to get on the basepaths lessens the value of that skill.
ok, but...
I hope you didn’t misunderstand the syntax of my post. I was trying to think of a sillier LOOKING hitter than Izturis or Kennedy… and Juan Pierre came to mind. I was in no way claiming he was a good hitter.
You also are correct about his batting eye… I thought he had more walks than he does.
Sorry about that
I agree. Pierre’s approach is indeed awkward to watch, even more so when you factor his contract and below average abilities.
i'm confused
about the idea of a high/respectable obp being “propped up” by high bating average. this seems to suggest that high BAs are a problem and you would prefer that a higher fraction be attributed to walks, etc.. don’t see why. seems more likely that higher BA means he is making contact more often and that seems a good thing. i’m not saying getting on base is not good, but the differential (mainly walks) kind of represents a less than ideal result in many cases. i’ll take OBP as high as possible by any means and low strikeout rates. don’t know if the stat is available, but wonder if folks like pierre make more productive outs than these hitters who walk more. i just see so many hitters who have an opportunity to make a productive out, but obviously aren’t looking to do that. most of my gripe here is the sac fly (i realize it has no effect on BA or OBP), because in so many cases you can tell the hitter is not even thinking about getting that runner in,. rbi’s are still the most important thing and getting the sac fly or moving the runner into position to score on same doesn’t seem so popular these days,m despite the fact that at least 2/3 of all BAs end in outs.
If you can keep your head when all about you are losing theirs, perhaps you haven't grasped the situation!
It sort of depends
on what you are looking at. The more a player’s OBP is made up of BA, the more it is worth. Hits are worth more than walks. As far as projecting players, you want to know that the BA is repeatable. If a player has an OBP propped up by a flukey BA, I’ll take the guy with the high BB%.
Making contact is only beneficial insofar as it helps a player’s batting average. As far as the value of the actual outs, there isn’t much difference. Players that move a runner over more often also ground into more double plays. It’s mostly a wash.
"Productive" outs
I want to make sure that everyone is one the same page when defining just what isa “productive out” for the purposes of this discussion. A “productive out” is one of three situational outs:
(1) advancing the runner with the first out of the inning;
(2) scoring a runner with the second out; or
(3) when a pitcher sacrifice bunts with the second out.
There was a lot of discussion back in 2004 about how productive outs helped or didn’t help in gauging good teams or players. Basically because the 2002 World Series Champion LAA Angels and 2003 World Series Champion Florida Marlins were POP (Productive Out Percentage) artists. The oversimplified argument was that good teams make more productive outs than bad teams. Of course, this argument was put forth by sports journalists who merely paroted old guard clubhouse types and didn’t bother to actually see if, in fact, good teams made more productive outs-had a higher POP than-bad teams.
Larry Mahnken did a very interest pair of articles for the Hardball Times on this very subject. An interesting takeaway was that while LAA and FLA did well in terms of POP, they did worse than clubs eliminated in the first round of the playoffs.
I found that, indeed, Anaheim and Florida did very well in making their outs productive in the past two postseasons. Anaheim’s POP in 2002 was .388, while Florida’s was .369 in 2003. Both teams, however, ranked third in this category among all playoff teams each season, Anaheim behind St. Louis (.526) and San Francisco (.393) in 2002, Florida behind Atlanta (.500) and San Francisco (.450) in 2003.
(My hasty googling could not produce the second story. If anyone else can find it, please post it. They are both thought-provoking reads that I would highly recommend.)
Of course, this is cross-arguing players who make productive outs vs. postseason teams who made productive outs at a high rate. Nonetheless, it gives us a bit of perspective.
Another source of perspective are Expected Run Tables (ERT). Dan Levitt for The Baseball Analysts summarizes what an ERT is far better than I ever could:
As a technical note, although I refer to these tables as expected runs tables to conform to common terminology, they technically reflect averages. That is, the tables represent the total runs scored over the remainder of the half-inning starting from a particular base/out situation divided by the number of such situations.
The above-linked article references results from Retrosheet’s play-be-play data from 1977-1992, for both the NL and AL, since DH affects run scoring. As an example, in the NL, getting your leadoff batter in an inning to first base with no one out puts a club in a situation where, on average, teams score .820 runs per inning. Getting a runner on first base with two outs, by comparison, clubs only average .210 runs. This makes logical sense.
Now, lets compare two situations. Juan Pierre comes up with a runner on first base and nobody out. As noted above, his club has a run expectancy of .820 this inning as Pierre digs into the box. Say that Pierre lays down a sacrifice bunt, moving the baserunner to second base with one out. His team’s run expectancy is now .650 for that inning. Instead of bunting, suppose Pierre walks, moving the runner to second base without sacrificing an out with Pierre now on first base. With runners on first and second with zero outs, his club’s run expectancy for the inning has now shot up to 1.402—over double that of a runner on second with one out.
I’m not saying that I’d rather have Pierre not advance the runner when he gets out. Obviously, if he is going to make an out, it’s better for the team that he advance the runner to second base with the out. What I am saying is that reaching first base safely-whether by walk or hit-helps the team more in terms of expected scoring that inning than a “productive out” would.
Here's the
Pizza Cutter looked at this using WPA. The spread of “skill” among the MLB population seems to be about a win. So it’s a handful of runs on either side of average (which is why I used some qualifiers in my original post).
Joey Gathright is a bit of an outlier. My guess is that’s because he doesn’t strike out incredibly often, puts the ball on the ground 2/3rds of the time and hardly ever grounds into double plays because of his blazing speed. Eg, that’s from 2003 where he hit 66.9% GB in 383 AB and just 3 GDP.
That should be 2006
and it looks like the outlier on the other end is V-Mart. 27 double plays in 2006.
Nevermind
that’s what I get for not reading it again. He tossed strikeouts in that study. And of course there wasn’t much of a yty correlation either.
cyrilmorong@sbcglobal.net/PRODA.htm”>This might be better, but now I don’t have time to read it either.Ugh
Don’t know why that didn’t link right. http://www.geocities.com/cyrilmorong@sbcglobal.net/PRODA.htm
clearly
advancing a runner w/o making an out is the better deal. what i was trying to say is that the teams that have the highest % of productive outs should do well, but not as well as team with the same %, but that makes fewer outs. it is what you do with the outs you make in the afore mentioned situations that counts, though i don’t believe a sacrifice should be viewed the same as going to right to move a runner to 3rd w/ less than 2 outs. setting out to make an out (sacrifice) is a different deal to me.
If you can keep your head when all about you are losing theirs, perhaps you haven't grasped the situation!
Exactly
You wouldn’t want to pay a player (say, Juan Pierre) $8M when his OBP is below .340. Sure, a bushel of his outs might be productive, but one would assume these are not overly more than a player with a higher OBP (who doesn’t make as many outs).
That was what I was getting at in the Juan Pierre discussion. Juan Pierre does not have a good batting eye. He therefore walks too little. He makes too many outs for his contract. This hurts LA offensively (as it did the Cubbies). Especially, if you give him the most PA’s of any player on your team by batting him leadoff.
high BAs are not a problem, but a low walk % can indicate a lack of overall plate discipline. if a player has their eyes but not their bat, they can still draw walks. players go through slumps, and hitting performance declines with age. i see a .325/.350 hitter as a current positive, but also a potential problem for the future.
i don’t really care about hitter’s strikeout rates as studies show ‘there is little evidence to suggest that a strikeout is “worse” than a groundout, popout, or any other means of making an out, with respect to generating runs’. i do care about our pitchers recording strikeouts.
as for sac flies, players in general do make more contact with the ball but studies show that ‘they are not hitting more fly balls per ball in play’.
FIP > ERA, OBP > AVG
agreed,
but they should.
also, seems strikeouts a re big negative. part of the problem with our lineup is that tony is batting two high strikeout rate hitters back to back (lud and ank), which can really be a rally killer. considering lud’s splits against lefthanders, maybe he should be placed in the lineup as if he were a left handed hitter and not bat next to ank.
If you can keep your head when all about you are losing theirs, perhaps you haven't grasped the situation!
are you saying they should hit more fly balls per batted ball into play? if hitting more fly balls per batted ball into play were a skill, i think there should be a noticeable difference in sac and non-sac situations. also per the linked article:
“Note that the flyball rate is virtually identical for sac fly situations and for all situations (29 percent compared to 28.4 percent). Batters just don’t seem to be able to hit more fly balls even when they have a strong incentive to do so.”
i’ve already stated what i think about strikeout hitters – it doesn’t innately bother me.
FIP > ERA, OBP > AVG
A Mistake in stats:
It certainly doesn’t mean you’re wrong (in fact, your error was pretty favorable towards AK) but you said AK’s OBP and Slugging were .308 and .304 and then came up with a .637 OPS.
His stats have climbed recently, with a couple good games, and he’s STILL not up to a .637 OPS as of right now, but .308 and .304 give him an even worse .612 OPS at the time you wrote your original post.
There both exceding my expectations....
....maybe thats why I’m somehow satisfied with them. I’m probably a little blinded by clutch plays during the moment. Either that or Tony should really be considered for manager of the year.
Exceeding or met?
Because they have met mine (for the season) and it is an ugly accomplishment. Yes, AK hit a double off of Papelbon to extend Sunday’s game, but that does not outweigh his .649 OPS for the season.

by 
















