Like this trade for the nats... Get a good on base/contact speed guy for a shitty reliever.

Revere is a bad defender with a career .328 OBP and no power whatsoever. They can have him. I'll take the RP with a 5 year track record of being very effective.

Yep, he is so good you were able to get him for Ben Revere. More importantly heard the jays want to extend Joey Bats and Encarnacion... looking forward to seeing what jack they give two mid 30's roid heads.

I don't know, it seems like he can still be sold as a "good on base/contact speed guy" to morons like yourself. LMAO

You really are out of touch, aren't you? There's little chance they extend either one of them and definitely not both. The Jays don't have the kind of money to throw 80M+ at mid 30s DHs (even if they are two of the best hitters in baseball right now).

WTF does this have to do with the Royals ???????????????????????

Don't get touchy because your a Jays fan... Atkins was on with Bowden earlier saying he has discussed extensions with both Joey Bats and EE. More than likely they'll be traded off this season as you fall beneath the tide of the Red Sox and Yankees.

Touchy? Maybe try not speaking with authority in the future about things with which you know nothing about. It would help everyone involved, not the least of which yourself.

I'm aware of that interview. And no, Atkins hasn't discussed extensions with either one of them (just the desire to do so, although even that remark is just him placating fans). If you knew anything about the team, you'd know there's little chance of that happening. The money isn't there. And even if it was, the new administration wouldn't use it in that way. From the sounds of it, though, it seems we can both agree that giving out long, expensive contracts to mid 30s DHs is a bad idea.

Alex Gordon

Yuniesky Betancourt

Shut your whore mouth

I like Cuthbert but I dont have the baseball knowledge all you guys do. Every time I seen him last year that looked like a major league bat and adequate glove.

Steamer WAR predictions for 2016 out today:

Cleve 85
White Sux 81
Royals 79
Tigers 79
Twinks 78


There are 54 wins still out on the FA market. If you bought the top guy at each spot, you'd end up with 80 wins. Or a Royals team, only for like $250M

-assuming we get another starter, which we will, you can add 1-3 wins for that for pretty much any guy not named Guthrie

How will WAR be modified to make it relevant again?

Isn't this the same projection that had the Royals in the cellar last season?

No, that was PECOTA. That has a long term +/- of 8 vs this which is 4.

Cleve, Det and Minny look to be done with adds (Cleve already said it). Sux in on some rumors but they just took on $12M with Frazier + Lawrie.

Yep pretty much.

I guess the Royals didn't read the article. Any Cleveland team is a great bet to put your money on. Bet the Farm.

When these "projections" start projecting us to be good is when I will be concerned.

They projected the Royals at a sterling 81-81 for 2015.

Vegas had 80.5:
http://www.ibtimes.com/mlb-2015-seas...totals-1870940

<a class="embedly-card" href="https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=oPwrodxghrw">Get Smart: Missed it by that much</a> <script async src="//cdn.embedly.com/widgets/platform.js" charset="UTF-8"></script>

Going with the Cleveland Steamers again I see.

NEXT!

stupid shit.

Ah, yes, much ado about nothing.

The "projections"- any of them, worked out so well last year, why not just rinse and repeat for 2016.
Square peg, round hole.

To start with, the variance already clusters 90% of the teams within about a 10 game difference, so the significance of their modeling is rather arbitrary. It's almost the equivalent of having a poll result of A at 45% & B at 55% with a margin of error of +/- 20 points.
Sure, you spit out a number, and based it upon some "data", but that doesn't ensure it's reliability.

Which brings us to the second point. Clearly, whatever the Royals are doing in terms of team makeup and approach to the game is unaccounted for in part of how they came up with their formula.
Last year, the Royals blew every wins prediction out of the water, and let's not forget to factor in September. The team was so far ahead in the standings and even admitted to struggling with being bored and remaining motivated while waiting for the playoffs to get under way. Otherwise, it's safe to say that they would have won over 100 games.
I'm not building up their talent for a comparison basis, but to illustrate just how totally off the expected wins predictions are, and even more so when they cluster most teams together, it's a virtually insignificant exercise.

Has the magic of the World Series worn off for you yet?

If it has, listen to this call on Jim Rome and I guarantee you'll bring back all the appreciation you had for the championship and MORE.

Begins at 1:05

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/aYgEzkseJKE" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Awesome.

Awesome!

Nice

dumb

Vegas doesn't predict. It balances bets.

[emoji122] [emoji133] [emoji471] [emoji106]

That call man. So awesome

All I can say to that is: go put $ on it. "Our friends in the desert", as Brent Musberger so aptly puts it, have access to everything you & I don't and they don't put out lines people can game.

I hope they're wrong again but I wouldn't dare bet against them. As of last Oct 31 we are middle of the pack in the futures
http://www.vegasinsider.com/mlb/odds/futures/

Vegas doesn't pick winners, they set the line to hedge their bet by trying to get a 50/50 split on each side. That's in part based upon public perception.

Their "inside info" comes into play when they set a line that draws heavy action because it seems like a "lock".

If the odds are 5:1 on the Royals, how much action do you think they're going to take in? Compare it to if you have 40:1 odds. You're going to end up with more longshot bets for which they may have to pay out on a single team, but keep the everything on the other 29 teams.

When you say, I wouldn't bet against Vegas, all you're really saying is I wouldn't bet at all. Period.

Did Vegas pick KC last year?

I'd advise you not taking betting tips from a 90 year old broadcaster.

It is a bit of a misnomer that Vegas wants bets to be 50/50. Sometimes they gamble as well. Here is some information from the Wynn Sports book.

Wynn sportsbook director Johnny Avello told ESPN that in Vegas alone, an estimated $10 million swung from one side to the other with the late touchdown by the Tigers.

"It was enormous for us," said Ed Salmons, race and sportsbook manager for the Westgate Superbook. "It's just like the Super Bowl. You want the favorite to win because there are a lot of underdog bets on the money line, but you don't want them to cover the spread. So it worked out perfectly for us."

Salmons said the late Clemson touchdown was worth well more than $100,000 to the positive for his sportsbook.




I read a couple of articles yesterday (I can't find them) that said 80% of the bets at a couple of casinos were coming in for 'Bama to cover. The casinos weren't raising the line trying to get more money on Clemson.

... and that's where they employ the bookies to be on top of things.
Yes, a line doesn't just move to balance 50/50- that's where the book taps into their secret sauce. How much a line moves is a good indication of the book's confidence level of the opening line.

It's a lot easier to find diamond picks in more obscure games if you know lower tier college football or basketball. The sportsbooks also don't see a ton of action on them so it's not a position where they often get overexposed.

Super Bowl Sunday is the biggest betting day of the year. Why? Because every Tom, Dick, and Harry toss $$$ at hunch bets. Vegas loves all the fish, even if they have to pay out to a few donkeys.

I intend to do exactly that. Last summer I put $50 at 40:1 on the Chiefs to win the Super Bowl. If I win that $2000, I'll put it all on the Royals to win at least 81 games.

I wouldn't even bother. This concept (that a house can/does take a position) has been explained multiple times on this board, but it never sinks in. It's simply no match for the quick meme "Vegas only wants half the public" rejoinder, which cannot ever die no matter how false it is in actuality.

I'm not going to talk about gambling. What am I going to talk about?

It's a DI Special - I'm going to talk about a kid who is 4-5 years away from playing in the majors!

I've heard the royals connected to Cuban phenom Lazarito in the past few days. He has been declared a free agent and is not subject to bonus pool limitations like normal Latin America prospects.

KC, due to the amount it spent signing LA players in 2015, is facing limits on what it can spend moving forward as a result. So it might make sense for them to spend big on Lazarito. They'd pay a dollar-for-dollar tax on him but would face no worse penalty, really, than if they didn't sign him.

Why should they consider it? Well, Lazarito is the equivalent of a top 5 draft pick. He's a 5-tool corner OF, just 16, who is very physically mature for his age and has crazy athleticism and explosiveness. He's a special talent, but carries major risk like all prospects. Will be interesting to see where he lands.

Another note: Italian youngster Marten Gasparini has drawn some rave reviews from BA scouting hounds, who ranked him in KC's top 10. He's probably not going to stick at SS due to his glove, but he profiles nicely as a future CF type with great speed.

His tools have been favorably compared to Mondesi's, and Mondesi has some of the best tools in the minors.

Perhaps. But what has been definitively proven to be false in recent years are the predictions that the Vegas insiders make regarding the number of games the Royals will win in the regular season.

It's foolish to say "they know more than we do about this" when they consistently demonstrate the opposite.

I can respect that. Putting real $ on something is way better than lecturing someone that they're wrong. Vegas is no different from stock market analysts or any other prognosticator - they have to rely on underlying fundamental data and adjust from there. I suspect they'll look at the 80 wins and bump it 1-2 games.

thank you Duncan for talking about playing baseball, or, players that play baseball instead of gambling on baseball. Needs to be a "gambling" thread so it won't clutter up this baseball thread.

Thanks for the info and back to béisbol talk!

Last thing I'll say about it, because I agree with your sentiment above.

Mainly, the majority of people who post in this thread obviously watch the Royals A LOT more than John Q Public, and have a reasonably better idea of how they shape up among especially the division and to a degree the rest of the league. I know there's a few that posters here and the GDTs that I would buy their predictions over pretty much anyone in the media.

It's no different than the utter nonsense and total bullshit "insider info" 99% of the guys reported with respect to Gordon, FA, and his likelihood of remaining with KC.
Way too much throwing crap at the wall and see if it sticks.

@Buster_ESPN: Wei-Yin Chen's deal with the Marlins is for five years, with a sixth-year vesting option.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Gerardo Parra has signed with <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Rockies?src=hash">#Rockies</a> for 3 years and $26 million, according to report from my friend <a href="https://twitter.com/WilmerReina">@WilmerReina</a>.</p>&mdash; Jon Morosi (@jonmorosi) <a href="https://twitter.com/jonmorosi/status/686971408253988864">January 12, 2016</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>


Little cheaper than I was expecting he would get. Good deal for the Rocks, IMO.

Damn

Rockies likely to try and trade Cargo, Blackmon, or Dickerson. Would the Royals get involved?

Regarding the Indians and love of them...

Still not a ton of upside offensively (average at max) for them, the defense is still bad at most spots besides SS, and the bullpen is just OK.

But they have four starting pitchers who strike out tons of guys, so FIP loves them and so do projections systems.

I don't know if they will with Gordon on board, but Blackmon or Dickerson would be a really nice fit in KC's lineup.

Dickerson has some major power and is younger, but he is injury prone. Blackmon is really fast and could, I think, play a quality RF.

CarGo obviously is the most proven bat name, but he'd cost the most to acquire, is controlled for the shortest period, and has the least years of control left.

If KC could build something around Almonte and get one of Dickerson/Blackmon, I would do it. But not sure that would be enough for Colorado.

I like Dickerson. For those of us who aren't experts in sports injuries, is plantar fasciitis something that becomes a chronic injury, or could we expect him move past it?
Posted via Mobile Device

Typically is chronic. It's one of the ailments that Pujols has dealt with for so long.

Didn't think his case was particularly severe for some reason.

Harbaugh rockin' the off-season championship gear...

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Thanks D.C. Mandarin Hotel 4 Awesome sculpture made all out of sugar. Compliments of Chef Jeff Munchel. Go Blue! <a href="https://t.co/RuXKhljIf1">pic.twitter.com/RuXKhljIf1</a></p>&mdash; Coach Harbaugh (@CoachJim4UM) <a href="https://twitter.com/CoachJim4UM/status/687006190874800128">January 12, 2016</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

I'm thinking we are going to see a lot of Royals fans come out of the closet.

I would definitely prefer Blackmon over Dickerson, but I don't think they would take a light package including Almonte as the center piece. Which is exactly what you were thinking. I think they are perfectly content with what they have.

His wife is from KC

I call these projections bullshit as I did last year. The Royals are still the best team in the division.

The Angels are apparently involved in Blackmon trade talks. Miguel Almonte would be their No. 1 prospect, so unless they're sending back a Cron, that would be a do-able thing.

/Mets lite

There's a large contingent of Royals fans in the Bay area?

Did not know.

I think you mean MLB- until proven otherwise.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Royals seem very focused on Kennedy. Good yanks connection there w/excellent pitching coach eiland. Others still in tho.</p>&mdash; Jon Heyman (@JonHeyman) <a href="https://twitter.com/JonHeyman/status/687256775582728192">January 13, 2016</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

I find if you add the phrase, "According to me," before any Royals rumors tweets and whatnot, it lends a lot of perspective on the veracity of the information being given.

@Ken_Rosenthal: Source confirms: #Royals serious about signing free-agent RHP Ian Kennedy. Would forfeit No. 24 pick in draft. First reported: @jonheyman.

Isn't Heyman the guy that said Royals had no chance of re-signing Gordon?

Then place a bet on it this spring. Hootie used to tell me all the time how dumb Vegas was, and the bettors being fools. then he got into the Fanduel group hug here and lost nearly all their $ within 2 weeks.

Vegas isn't dumb but the projections they use haven't caught up to the Royals. It's already been proven and will be again. They were clearly the best team in the regular season and their losses had no major impact on the regular season. No one has done enough to catch up. They will win a weak division again barring injuries. Winning the whole thing is another story. They'll need to make some moves.

Wasn't he talking about the Sabremetric/fangraphs, rather than vegas?

Just saying, I'd feel better if Vegas put us at 88 than 78. Obv, everything plays out on the field.

Yes. Said "swag" wasn't accounted for in their formulas.

@Ken_Rosenthal: Sources: #Royals talking to Gallardo as well as Kennedy. Either would cost KC 1st-rounder. #Padres would get comp pick after 1st round.

Projection systems continue to expect some things the Royals to excel at to normalize:

1) RP performance.
2) Defensive excellence
3) HR/FB rate

Despite the fact the royals have been excellent at 1) and 2) for a very large sample size (five seasons now), severe drop-off continues to be projected.

Despite the fact the Royals play at minimum 100 games/year at Ballparks that suppress the HR (Kaufman, Detroit, Minnesota, HR/FB regression continues to be projected.

At some point, you have to admit your model isn't working.

1 and 2 also pass the eyeball test. We have a historically good defense and Wade Davis looks unhittable (whereas Holland was clearly getting lucky most of last year).

9 and 15 last year with a 4.28 ERA. Also has a 3.98 career ERA.

It's important to distinguish what it is you're talking about here. You are explaining why last winter's FORWARD projections did not align with reality. And I would say to you that those things are good reasons, although there are prob many more. That is conceded by SABR folks, who readily admit FW projections have 5-10 game standard deviations, with 10+ swings not uncommon. (Put aptly: "shit happens" with injuries, etc)

Nobody should be surprised by the final standings.


But this is where we diverge. I (and others) want to know why the BACKWARDS looking metrics, notably PyThag + BaseRuns, don't align either. Because we **know** what happened and we have decades of data points showing what the record should've been. Your factors are all incorporated into the backwards data. So why did we win 95?


All we have today is that we sequenced out of our minds and had the highest "clutch" score in MLB. There's no explanation for that.

The Royals were projected to win 76 in 2013, 77 in 2014, and 81 in 2015.

Are we going to chalk up three years of incorrect metrics to "luck" and "clutch performances?"

****

Rany is counting down the top 218 monents of the 2014-2015 Royals.

Setup: http://www.ranyontheroyals.com/2016_01_03_archive.html

First installment: http://www.ranyontheroyals.com/2016/...s-city_11.html

*** Official 2016 Royals Offseason Repository ***
 

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/a-tho...f-ian-kennedy/



A Thorough Consideration of Ian Kennedy

by Jeff Sullivan - January 13, 2016

You probably didn’t wake up today thinking “today I’d like to read something about Ian Kennedy.” That’s fine. You probably didn’t wake up yesterday thinking “today I’d like to read something about Wei-Yin Chen” or “today I’d like to read something about the Marlins,” but both those things got folded into the same post. It’s the middle of January. This isn’t the time of year when people are thinking about baseball. Even when people are thinking about baseball, they’re only very infrequently thinking about Ian Kennedy. Even he knows he’s not the most high-profile starting pitcher around.

It’s just — okay: Posts have to be written. They might as well be written about what’s going on. And at the moment, Kennedy remains a free agent, with reports indicating his market has heated up. At any moment now, Kennedy could officially end up with a new employer, and he’s going to get a mid-eight-figure deal. Maybe it’s going to come from the Royals. Maybe it’s going to come from the Orioles or somebody else, but a deal will materialize. Right now Kennedy is of some interest, so it’s time for him to be thoroughly considered. The following will be conducted with points and counterpoints.


The starting position: Kennedy is a free-agent starting pitcher. He’s available to anyone with money and an opening. Or, at least, a potential opening. So let’s go with money and interest. If you want Ian Kennedy, and if you can afford Ian Kennedy, you can get Ian Kennedy.

BUT

Last season, Kennedy allowed the highest OPS among all qualified pitchers. Literally the very highest — higher than Alfredo Simon, and higher than Aaron Harang. Now, the fact that Kennedy managed to be a qualified pitcher in the first place indicates it wasn’t all bad, but that’s true for all the qualified pitchers, and…Kennedy allowed the highest OPS. He basically turned his average opponent into Mitch Moreland. That’s not a wonderfully-constructed sentence, since maybe you don’t realize how good a hitter Moreland was last season, but Moreland was a good hitter last season. Strong. This happened to Kennedy in the National League, spending half his time pitching in San Diego.

BUT

The season before, among all qualified pitchers, Kennedy was around the middle of the pack. He was in a similar situation, but his OPS was better by well more than 100 points, and he wound up tied with Shelby Miller and Yovani Gallardo. A tiny bit better than James Shields. It’s not like Kennedy hasn’t been good recently; he just hasn’t been good most recently. But there is a decent track record here.

BUT

Kennedy just allowed home runs on more than 17% of his fly balls. Only Shields and Kyle Kendrick were worse — by less than half of one percentage point. Several of Kennedy’s pitches were getting slaughtered. He had a legitimate dinger problem, and there’s no quicker ticket out of a game than giving up dingers. It’s the single worst possible outcome.

BUT

You know how finicky these things are. The year before last, Kennedy allowed home runs on less than 8% of his fly balls. So he had the opposite of a dinger problem. (A dinger solution?) His career mark is just under 11%, over more than 1,200 innings. And I decided to do a bit of bigger-picture research. Since 2002, 1,286 pitchers have thrown at least 100 innings in back-to-back seasons. I looked at the best and worst home-run pitchers in Year 1. I grouped all the pitchers with Year 1 HR/FB rates of at least 16% — they averaged 17.4%. In Year 2, they averaged 11.0%. At the other end, I grouped all the pitchers with Year 1 rates no higher than 6% — they averaged 5.2%. In Year 2, they averaged 9.4%. Something, yes. But so, so heavily regressed. Kennedy probably isn’t a pitcher with a home-run problem. He’s a pitcher who had a home-run problem.

BUT

Over the last three years, only Kyle Lohse and Colby Lewis own higher hard-hit rates. It follows that Kennedy also has a low soft-hit rate. Evidence certainly suggests that Kennedy is a below-average contact manager, that batters are able to get pretty good swings. In this way he isn’t Wei-Yin Chen.

BUT

One way to compensate for allowing hard contact? Allowing less contact. Used to be, Kennedy struck out roughly a fifth of all the hitters he faced. The last two years, he’s finished closer to a quarter. His strikeouts played up in 2014, and last year he didn’t give any of them back. It leads to a nifty K-BB%. Again, over two years, Kennedy has managed about the same K-BB% as Johnny Cueto, Jordan Zimmermann, Cole Hamels, and Phil Hughes. He’s been higher than Tyson Ross and Dallas Keuchel. Many of the peripherals you want are there. Kennedy does throw enough strikes, and he punches hitters out. This is the good stuff.

BUT

Sort pitchers from the last two years by K-BB%. Kennedy ranks 23rd. He’s the only guy in the top 30 with a three-digit ERA-.

BUT

You could just as easily argue that’s a good thing, not a bad thing. The xFIP- of 94 puts Kennedy even with Jeff Samardzija, who signed for $90 million. And he cost a draft pick.

BUT

Kennedy, also, will cost a draft pick. The Padres extended a qualifying offer, and now there will be extra value to be lost. You’re talking about a potential first-rounder, in exchange for a starting pitcher who just got hit around in his age-30 season. Some would argue it’s a steep price to pay.

BUT

Marco Estrada signed for two years and $26 million, and he cost a would-be pick. Wei-Yin Chen cost a pick at five and $80 million. John Lackey cost a pick at two and $32 million. Daniel Murphy cost a pick at three and $37.5 million. Draft picks are important, but they become far less important outside of the top five or top 10, and those are the protected picks. Remember, free agents can help you win right away. Even a good draft pick won’t likely return value for two or three years, at least.

BUT

Kennedy spent a lot of time last season trying to work on fixing his mechanics. You want your seasoned veterans to be pretty stable and consistent, but it seemed like Kennedy spent months just trying to find himself, with the help of his pitching coach.

BUT

Kennedy made a simple adjustment between his last start of May and his first start of June — he shifted over several inches on the rubber.

kennedy

It’s subtle, but these things usually are, and the adjustment more or less stuck the rest of the way. And, coincidentally or not coincidentally, Kennedy’s OPS allowed afterward improved by roughly 200 points. He still gave up some dingers, but Kennedy was much, much more effective as he distanced himself from the season’s start.

BUT

Kennedy just went on the DL for the first time since 2008. The best predictor of future injury is past injury.

BUT

He went on the DL with a hamstring strain. His arm has been fine, and he’s made at least 30 starts in all six of his seasons as a regular. So Kennedy has durability working in his favor, and beyond that, if anything his stuff is playing up. His first four years as a big-league starter, Kennedy’s fastball averaged about 90. Two years ago, he was at 91.8, and last year he was at 91.3. Last year his velocity also improved between May and June, as he made other mechanical adjustments. This is a quiet aspect to Kennedy’s re-emergence: he’s still allowed his hard contact, but he’s thrown harder than ever, and you have to figure that goes into the strikeout hike. You also have to figure that’s encouraging, as an indicator of health. It’s unusual for velocity to build as a pitcher gains years. Usually velocity starts declining early. Someone else who’s bucked the trend is J.A. Happ, who’s added strength as he’s aged. James Shields did the same before giving something back last season. Kennedy’s arm seems to be in good shape, for a pitcher his age, with that many miles.

=====

I’m not sure there’s anything more to be said. For every negative, there’s a positive; for every positive, there’s a negative. What we’re left with is something on the order of a league-average starter, with ball-in-play upside and ball-in-play downside, and the market has so far rewarded pitchers like this, so Kennedy shouldn’t be punished too much. Mike Leake has age on his side, and his own fastball has improved, but Leake probably has the bigger home-run problem. To add Ian Kennedy isn’t to add anything sensational, but there’s probably not a team in baseball he wouldn’t make at least a little bit better. Soon, we’ll find out where he goes. The fans, probably, will come away underwhelmed. Still, he’s likely to do more good than harm. He’s an addition you like more during the year than during the offseason. There’s not much point in winning the offseason.

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/still...vani-gallardo/


A look at Yovani Gallardo

Phase II of the 2015-16 free agent and trade markets has begun, with Alex Gordon re-upping with the Royals, and the rumor mill is again beginning to churn after a brief holiday-related respite. The elite and upper-middle-class arms have already secured their positions for 2016 and beyond, but some of the other middle class arms remain on the market.

The three free agent pitchers who are subject to draft pick compensation but are still likely to sign long-term deals are lefty Wei-Yin Chen and righties Yovani Gallardo and Ian Kennedy. At this stage in the game, it is likely that all three will need to settle for terms below consensus projections. Earlier this week, we took a look at Chen’s situation; today, we’ll dig a little bit deeper into Yovani Gallardo’s true value.

I was a member of the Milwaukee Brewers scouting staff when Gallardo was selected in the second round of the 2004 draft. In fact, that was my first year in the draft room. As the Northeast Scouting Supervisor, that year was quite an experience, as one of the prospects from my region, right-handed pitcher Mark Rogers, was our first-round pick, drafted fifth overall. While not squarely in the mix for our first-round selection, there was another high school righty who we clearly considered a first rounder: a Texas kid named Yovani Gallardo.

Some of our crosscheckers raved about Gallardo in a manner not often heard in my draft room experience. His stuff was strong, and had surged immediately prior to our draft meetings. He was an athletic kid who could really hit and field his position, and perhaps most importantly, Gallardo had made it absolutely clear that he wished to forego college and sign a professional contract.

There were some complicating factors, however. First, scouting Gallardo was not an easy proposition. He pitched at Trimble Technical HS in Fort Worth, a subpar program that played weak competition. I am being very kind here; this was not your typical Texas high school power conference. His club lacked a catcher who could meet the bare minimum requirements of his position when Gallardo was on the mound.

This wasn’t the only problem. Pitch counts? Gallardo was on the mound until the game ended. Never saw it in person, but I heard reports of 170-plus-pitch outings. On a bad day for his catcher, Gallardo would cut him a break and avoid his breaking stuff altogether. Pretty tough to project a player from this environment into the major leagues.

That said, when Gallardo was still available on the second round, we quickly pounced and announced his name. He signed quickly, dominated rookie ball, and actually logged a pair of full-season Low-A starts that draft summer, at the tender age of 18. He knifed through the minors, posting a 27-13, 2.59 career mark with a glittering 457:143 strikeout-to-walk ratio (K:BB) in 396.1 innings, all as one of the youngest competitors at each level.

Each season, I compile an ordered list of top minor league starting pitcher prospects, based on performance and age relative to level and league. Gallardo qualified for my list in each of his three minor league seasons, finishing among the top 10 twice, and peaking at #3 in 2007. That is generally a harbinger of excellence at the major league level.

Gallardo spent the second half of that 2007 season in the Brewers’ major league rotation, and excelled, posting a 9-5, 3.67 mark and 101:37 K:BB in 110.1 innings. The 2008 campaign was shaping up as a year of big expectations for the Brewers, and Gallardo was right in the center of it — until, of course, he suffered a major knee injury on a collision at first base in an early season start against the Cubs.

It did turn out to be a fairly magical season in Milwaukee, as they won the NL Central largely due to the second-half efforts of newly acquired starter CC Sabathia. Gallardo quietly, diligently rehabbed, and there he was, ready to go in time for the playoffs. Alas, Gallardo’s defense abandoned him in a short, earned run-free Game 1 NLDS start against the Phillies, and he was dubiously passed over for Jeff Suppan for the Game 4 start, dominating in long relief once the starter had been touched for a crooked number.

Though he never took the next step qualitatively in Milwaukee, he was a rock in terms of workload and dependability, making 190 starts over the next six seasons as a Brewer. He also threw in 12 homers at the plate for good measure. Heading into his 2015 free agent season, the Brewers dispatched him to the Rangers for minor leaguers Marcos Diplan, Corey Knebel, and Luis Sardinas.

While Gallardo did post the best full-season ERA of his career in 2015 as a Ranger, this is not the same pitcher one envisioned as he worked his way up to the big leagues. His average fastball velocity (90.5 mph in 2015) is over 2 mph lower than his career best, and his swing-and-miss rate, once as high as 9.3%, is now in the lower ranks of MLB starters at 6.5%.

Who is Yovani Gallardo as a pitcher at this point in time, and how much should a club invest in him moving forward? Let’s utilize granular batted-ball data to examine his plate appearance outcome frequencies and production allowed by ball-in-play (BIP) type in order to get a better feel.


Right off the top, the most notable aspect of Gallardo’s frequency table is his poor K:BB profile. His K rate ranked in the 17th, and his BB rate in the 78th percentile relative to his peers. This is a very shaky foundation upon which to build. Even worse are his trends in those categories over the years. His K rate was in the 89th percentile as recently as 2012, capping a four-year stretch in which it sat in a narrow band between the 89th and 94th percentiles. Now, it sits at a career-worst level.

His BB rate percentile rank was actually a better than league average 42 in 2014, but his 2015 performance is more in line with career norms; it’s been 70 or higher in five of the last seven seasons.

Gallardo has maintained a fairly pronounced ground-ball tendency throughout his career; his grounder rate percentile rank, a career high 82 in 2015, has been 62 or higher in six of his seven qualifying seasons. Liner rates, unlike those of other BIP types, fluctuate quite significantly from year to year. Therefore, one shouldn’t get too worked up about Gallardo’s 2015 liner rate percentile rank of 70; he’s been as high as 99 and as low as 13 in that category over his career. Some positive regression should be expected moving forward.

So, we have a poor K:BB hurler, with no margin for error, who at least has a fairly pronounced grounder tendency, giving him a chance for survival. To make any further conclusions, we’ll need to incorporate BIP authority data. Adjusted relative production allowed by BIP type information serves as an excellent proxy, and will give us a good feel for Gallardo as a contact manager.


The actual production allowed on each BIP type is indicated in the batting average (AVG) and slugging (SLG) columns, and is converted to run values and compared to MLB average in the REL PRD (or Unadjusted Contact Score) column. That figure is then adjusted for context, such as home park, team defense, luck, etc., in the ADJ PRD (or Adjusted Contact Score) column. For the purposes of this exercise, sacrifice hits (SH) and flies (SF) are included as outs and hit by pitchers (HBP) are excluded from the on-base percentage (OBP) calculation. One quick note here: I have presented this type of analysis many times, but only recently have I begun to show fly ball and line drive line items both separately and combined.

Right out of the chute, it’s quite apparent that Gallardo is a fairly average contact manager overall. He allowed a bit higher than league average production on FLY/LD combined (107 Unadjusted Contact Score), but adjustment for context (to 97 FLY/LD Adjusted Contact Score) shows he was a bit unlucky in the air. Conversely, his actual production allowed on the ground (78 Unadjusted Contact Score) swung the other way when adjusted for context (108 Adjusted Contact Score). Gallardo may yield a ton of grounders, but they were hit harder than the league average.

On all BIP combined, Gallardo compiled an Adjusted Contact Score of 96, just a bit better than average. Add back the Ks and BBs, and his “tru” ERA is 4.13, obviously well above his actual ERA, but also a bit above his FIP. Only four of the 36 2015 AL ERA qualifiers had higher “tru” ERAs. To post a 3.34 ERA in 2015, Gallardo relied on a combination of good defense, fortuitous sequencing, and good, old-fashioned luck.

The 2014 and 2013 campaigns don’t tell markedly different stories, either. Gallardo posted Adjusted Contact Scores of 100 and 99, respectively, in those two campaigns, and thanks to better K rates and pitching in the NL, logged “tru” ERAs of 3.78 and 3.92. On a scale of 100, his ERA- figures in the last three seasons were 104, 101 and 101. We’re talking about a durable innings guy here; nothing more.

At this point, let me re-introduce the concept of the K/BB Contact Score Multiplier. Basically, based on a pitcher’s K and BB rates relative to the league, a multiplier is assigned and applied to a pitcher’s Contact Score to estimate his “tru”, or true-talent ERA. In 2015, Gallardo’s K rate was over a full standard deviation below league average, and his BB rate was over one-half STD lower than league average. Based on results going back to 2009, his multiplier is 115.6. In 2010, it was a stellar 85.6, and it has deteriorated rapidly since.

Could he get back some of his K:BB losses, and improve his multiplier? Well, at best I could see him scraping an additional one-half positive STD in both categories, which would improve his multiplier to 106.9. It’s just as likely, however, that Gallardo’s effectiveness dips to the extent that he never again qualifies for an ERA title. He’s beginning to live on the edge, with his strikeouts and walks.

So if Gallardo is a 95 Adjusted Contact Score guy, with a 116.5 multiplier, he’s about a 110 ERA- pitcher. That’s not something that is sought out in the free-agent market. Giving him the full benefit of the doubt to a 106.9 multiplier and he’s a 102 ERA- pitcher. That’s a little easier to stomach, especially with his proven durability over the years. Me? I’m not giving him more than three years, at more than $12 million per season. And I’m looking high and low for other options in the trade market before I go there.

There are numerous clubs which would appear to be a fit. Prospective employers require strong team defense, in both the infield and outfield, as well as spacious outfield dimensions. He needs a low Unadjusted Contact Score to have a chance to succeed. Going back to Texas wouldn’t require draft pick compensation, so that’s the best fit of all. Clubs such as the Angels, Cards, Giants, Nationals, Pirates, and Royals — that is, contenders with ballparks that don’t yield many cheap fly ball homers — would give him the best chance to succeed.

Yovani Gallardo’s foundation is very shaky, belying the fine traditional numbers he posted in 2015. There really isn’t a ton of upside here. If you have a nice bullpen and are looking for a #4 starter who will stay healthy and keep you in the ballgame for six innings, however, you could do worse. The World Champion Royals — whose two ERA qualifiers, Yordano Ventura and Edinson Volquez, had “tru” ERAs of 3.84 and 3.96, respectively — say hello.

Here is a good exchange on Royals Review article discussing Steamer projections:

If they can add a decent pitcher, you probably get to an 80-82 win projection. You hope your guys outperform expectations and make acquisitions to supplement as needed. Maybe you go to the playoffs. Maybe you win 78 games. This is the best you can reasonably hope for if you don’t got that sweet, sweet Dodger money. I’m cool with this.


by 2motley4thetitle on 01.13.16 10:13am


----------------

Theoretical 81-win true talent level, plus 2 wins for the excellent bullpen (which is insufficiently accounted for in pythag, and hopefully in team projections), plus 2(?) wins for under-projected defense = 85 wins. A pretty good team who, with variance, gets back into the playoffs, or has a meh season.

The projections represent what seems most likely given the player's performance in recent seasons, and his age. Any level of 2016 performance is possible for any player, but not all possibilities are equally likely.

by Scott McKinney on 01.13.16 10:17am