An expert on baseball's Junior Circuit, Don's has worked as a columnist both in print and online for multiple outlets over the past seven years. This is Don's first season at Sports Grumblings.
Just because Jason Kendall hit below .200 for a month does not mean that he will hit for over .400 in another month to average things out.
I had an email over the weekend where a league-mate, trying to trade me Michael Young, mentioned that Young “gets 200 hits every year so the way i figure it is he will hit .350 the rest of the way.”
And while this person may be correct in that Young might hit 0.350 the rest of the way, there is a lot wrong with how the person arrives at such a conjecture. You know, it is like hitting when you are at 20 in blackjack, and end up getting an ace. Just because the move worked out, doesn’t make it the right play.
Last year when Michael Young was not showing power early on (he hit only five home runs through the first three months of the season), there was much speculation that since he hit 20+ home runs the previous two years, he would hit 15+ more during the second half (he ended up hitting nine). That assumes that Mike Young is a 30 home run hitter (since projecting 15 home runs in a half projects that). This is not right. As others have written more elegantly than I have here, a players future performance is projectable based on the type of hitter he is at that point and not what he has done previously (for better or worse). Getting back to our example, Mike Young is not a 0.350 hitter and, thus, to project that he will hit 0.350 in order to reach 200 hits is not right.
So…do I think Young is a 0.238 hitter, which is what he up to so far? No, not at all. Over the past four years, Young has averaged around a 0.315 batting average. If I believe he still is the same player (and I do), then I would project him to hit 0.315 over another 520 at-bats and end the season at a respectable 0.298 batting average.
All things being equal, on any given day a player has a normally distributed array of outcomes available for the future (assuming, of course, he is the same player for that future). Sometimes he performs better than (his own) average in a month and sometimes worst than (his own) average in a month. When he has a good year, he has more “better than average” months and visa versa. At any rate, sometimes a player produces an “outlier” month where they either perform a few standard deviations above or below their expected performance (assuming, of course, they aren’t injured, etc.). So, for example, Jason Kendall hit 0.169 in 89 at-bats in April of this year. If we assume he isn’t injured or has suffered a substantial skills loss, this month represents a performance a few standard deviations below his average/expected performance (Kendall was a career 0.301 hitter entering the season). In fact, good luck finding a full month in his career where he hit under 0.200 at any point. Does this mean that Kendall is “owed” a month where he hits, say, 0.413 to “balance out” that very low month? If one assumes that Kendall’s skill level will not change in the future, then you are correct…he is owed that month. There are two problems with that thinking, however. First, Kendall has to keep that same skill level into the future and, second, since an “outlier” month (either direction) is a rare occurrence, he may get that month of 0.413 he is owed in the year 2015.
The bottom line is that when a player gives you very low performance during a month, he is balanced by someone else producing a very high performance during that same month. A player’s monthly performance is limited to “six” months in a year. In the Majors, with 25 players on 30 teams over six months, that is 4500 months. Therefore, you are going to see several players who are performing a few standard deviations above or below their expected performance in any month…and it is very likely those players aren’t the same players during the year (injury and skills loss notwithstanding). Thus, I wouldn’t look to get Kendall in a buy-low move expecting him to finish the year as a 0.300 hitter.
At any rate, I will dispense of a team-by-team analysis this week and go right to some of the more contentious issues.
Matt De Salvo is apparently the No. 4 starter in New York, having bumped Darrel Rasner to a fifth starter. Joe Torre has already mentioned Rasner’s name with “middle relief”, so keep this in mind. Note that I think, eventually, De Salvo’s control issues will pop up sooner than later and he will find his way back to Triple-A. At that point, Rasner will be the No. 5 starter (when Roger Clemens joins the team).
Maicer Izturis should return this week and this will “allow” manager Mike Scioscia the ability to mix/match more with second base / third base slot. While this might be good for the Angels, it isn’t necessarily good for fantasy owners who have to chase at bats. Erick Aybar will be affected by the return of Izturis, but so could Chone Figgins.
I think I will update the performance of Andy Sonnanstine at Durham each week until he is in the rotation in Tampa Bay. Sonnanstine won both his starts last week, giving up seven hits in 14 2/3 innings pitched while striking out 15 (with only two walks). If you are in a league that allows you to draft minor leaguers, I would go out of my way to get him.
The inevitable happened in Minnesota as Sidney Ponson was released. As I mentioned a few weeks ago, Scott Baker is probably the name to know here, though my suspicion is that Glen Perkins will also get a chance if Baker fails. If called up, Baker will be on a short leash…that is for sure. In fact, if he fails in this chance, he is a good bet to find himself in another organization before the end of the year. Tampa Bay and Kansas City, are you listening?
Speaking of Kansas City, Zack Greinke pitched well in long relief the other night. This should earn him another turn in the rotation at some point soon. Personally, I think that he might be better served pitching a few high-leverage innings for the Royals (say fifth, sixth, or seventh). I mean, having him in that role, moving Joakim Soria to a set-up man and Octavio Dotel into the closer’s role (with Jimmy Gobble as a match-up lefty) has the makings of a useful pen. Of course, they have no back-end of the rotation, but what else is new.
In 2003, Jack Cust was recalled from Triple-A to serve as the Orioles DH on August 6th. He finished the season with 73 at bats over those two months and slugged 0.521 with an OBP of 0.357. He also struck out 25 times in those 73 at-bats. During the spring of 2004, Cust is given a lot of at-bats (51) and hits only 0.176 with 19 strikeouts. He breaks with the team in 2004, but gets one at bat (a strikeout) and is farmed back to Triple-A. Cust is released at the end of the year and signs on with the Athletics. There is no room for Cust with Oakland and he spends the entire season (sans call-up) in Triple-A. He signs on with San Diego the following year and provides a 0.549 slugging percentage in 441 at bats…for the good fans of the Portland Beavers in the PCL. In 2007, he was recently purchased by the Athletics (again) and now has six home runs, 14 RBI, and nine runs in 26 at-bats (with 11 strikeouts, of course). So, as a fantasy owner, you are faced with the Jack Cust Dilemma. Do you keep him thinking that he will become Geronimo Berroa or Matt Stairs for the Athletics? After all, all three are late 20s power hitters who were “found” by Oakland, with Stairs and Berroa becoming middle-of-the-order power hitters in their primes. There is one difference, though. It is the strikeouts. Cust, given a full season of at-bats, will own the strikeout record in the Major Leagues for a season. However, fans, managers, journalists, etc., do not like when hitters strike out too much. If you have Cust on your team, you owe it to yourself to see if you can sell high here. There is a chance that Oakland will be patient with Cust once he goes in a slump with the term “golden sombrero” (or worse) used often, but I am risk averse. As it stands now, with Milton Bradley back, Travis Buck around, Mark Kotsay getting closer to a return, Shannon Stewart playing admirably, the Athletics may do a lot more “resting” of players. Once again, good for Oakland, but bad for your fantasy roster.
Last, but not least, the Twins have reached down to their farm system to promote…Garrett Jones. If you haven’t heard much about Jones, that is okay. The minor league lifer (2600 at-bats) is 27 years old and has a career 0.300 OBP. He was hitting over 0.300 with five home runs for Rochester which, apparently, has earned him a promotion to the Majors. “I’m just going to put him in the lineup and see what happens”, Twins manager Ron Gardenhire said about Jones. Don’t waste your FAAB on Jones is my opinion. He probably shouldn’t rent an apartment but get one of those places you can lease month-by-month…or shorter.
Expert League Updates
With the conclusion of Sunday’s games, my team is leading the CBS SportsLine Analysts League by 2.5 points. Notable transactions this week include people jumping on Scott Baker as well as Shaun Marcum (this one was mine). It is funny, here is this 12-team league with 7 reserve spots and Marcum is available, yet in my home league with 10 teams and no reserve spots, Marcum has been out of the pool for several weeks.
An expert on baseball's Junior Circuit, Don's has worked as a columnist both in print and online for multiple outlets over the past seven years. This is Don's first season at Sports Grumblings.