Pepper, July 19

Subscribe to Comments for "Pepper, July 19"

Replies

SABR Matt's picture

Hey Doc...remember three years ago when I was calling the NL AAAA and you were barking at me not ot make light of a major league like that?  How do you feel now?

As for Gutierrez, he really needs to not be hitting 5th.  It's blinkin' stupid to waste his bat that low in the order.  I'd be hitting him 2nd between Ichiro and Branyan and hitting Griffey down there in 5th.  But perhaps that's jsut me. :)

Guti is getting increasingly exciting the longer he keeps his hitting going.  This could be an MVP candidate we're looking at here.  Can you see this guy with his +15 or better defense in CF hitting 35 bombs?

SABR Matt's picture

I remember very vividly you saying I shouldn't be quite so bold in my language saying the NL was AAAA when it had good players like Hanley Ramirez, Chase Utley, etc.  This came up in a conversation about the Mariners going after Alfonso Soriano...I suggested, basically, that his up-year in DC was the result of the change from the AL to the NL.  You didn't seem to agree.

jemanji's picture
Submitted by jemanji on

If you meant that the NL was literally AAAA, then I'm sure I objected, counselor.

As it happens, I spend a fair amount of time in a nearby PCL ballpark.  None of the visiting teams have Chipper Jones and Javier Vazquez.

Now, if you had said JAPAN was only AAAA, I might (or might not) have refrained from throwing a base to express my appreciation. :- )

.................

The PCL is comprised of 70-80% fringe major leaguers (and some future good major leaguers), but the problemo is that even the 2003 Tiggers had 100% fringe major leaguers plus several currently-good major leaguers...

 

SABR Matt's picture

To me, the reason the NL is weak right now is not just a lack of top talent...they have some guys in the NL who could come over here and still be great (see: Miguel Cabrera)...it's consistency of top quality competition.  The reason the AL spanks the NL every year in the All-star game is that the AL has more depth of great players, not that the NL has no great players.  But the reason the AL beats the NL in interleague is IMHO that the NL has more really bad major leaguers on its' collective roster.  The AL wins by feasting on any point of weakness...usually NL bullpens and the back of NL rotations suffer horrible poundings.

To me, the main difference between the most competitive league and the next league down is not talent but consistency.  There's lots of talent in AAA...but there are more bad players there and more players who just lack the ability to be at their best on a consistent basis.  That is precisely the NL's problem right now too.

So how are they NOT AAAA?

jemanji's picture
Submitted by jemanji on

Because I agree with the title of your reply:  we will quickly get into *semantics* when arguing whether "AAAA" is a fair description of the NL.

In this case it would be better to use specifics rather than judgments, probably. 

The fact that seven AL teams would go 93-69 each, and seven NL teams 69-93 each, if we had a combined league -- that speaks to one whale of a difference in quality right now.

The National League cannot really claim that it is on a par with the AL any more.  That's shame enough, whether or not we decide to relegate them.  :- )

jemanji's picture
Submitted by jemanji on

To take opinions as to how the following teams would do in a combined league:

1. AL 93-69

2.  NL 69-93

3.  Average Japanese team?

4.  Average PCL team?

5.  UW Husky women?

Maybe you should do a post Matty.  :- )

SABR Matt's picture

...the drop-off between "levels" of play results in a .667 W% for the guy in the higher class.  I think if you stuck the average PCL team in a game against average big leaguers, that's about what you'd get.

So if we had a combined league, we'd have:

14 teams in level 1

16 teams in level 2

1 team a little below level 2

The 81-81 AL team would win 50% of the time against the 13 other AL clubs, 57% of the time against the 16 NL clubs, and 67% of the time against the PCL team.  If the schedule was balanced, the AL club would go 88-74.

The PCL team would win 33% of the time against the AL teams and through use of the odds ratio method we estimate that they'd win .33 * (.57/.43) or 44% of the time against the NL clubs for a total record of 63-99.  The NL clubs would go about 70-92 or 69-93.

Sandy - Raleigh's picture
Submitted by Sandy - Raleigh on

First, I must admit that each time I hear another argument denegrating the NL, it makes me a little angrier than the previous time.  In all honesty, the interleague record is undeniable.  So, mostly I just bit my lip.  But, here's the thing.  While the evidence is hard to deny - I am severely disappointed in the (reluctance - inability - laziness), of the people so willing to deride the NL to actually offer any EXPLANATION for what might be the root causes of the problem.  I suspect the answer here is that it is simply easier to sit back and gloat than attempt to uncover data that might enlighten rather than simply pander.

So, since nobody else is - I decided to take a look.

It's been noted that "good players" seem to move more to the AL than to the NL.  Well, if they are FAs, this should impact salary.  So, what are the league average salaries?

2008 - AL = $96,834,478

2008 - NL = $83,074,624

Well, spending $13 million more per team is definitely an interesting find.  The more interesting find was that the AL spend $25 million more in RAW dollars, despite having two fewer teams.  Note:  Only 4 teams have paid Luxury tax as of 2009: all 4 are AL teams.

Interleague play started in 1997, and the NL won 117-97.  The records from '97 - '04 were pretty much even.  Both leagues won 4 of those 8 years.  In 2004, the AL edge was 126-125.  So, yes, the past 5 years the AL has had a major edge.  136-116; 154-98 ('06 remains the most lop-sided season); 137-115; 149-103; 137-114. 

But, something that came in almost simultaneous to interleague play was the last MLB expansion.  Since 1998, the NL has had 16 teams, the AL 14. 

My conclusions:

1) The AL does have more total talent PER TEAM than the NL.

2) The AL has achieved this primarily by buying FAs, leading to a $13 million per team in payroll for the AL.

3) The 14 vs. 16 team leagues is likely a significant disadvantage for the NL, as a smaller percentage of the NL can make the playoffs (and reap those financial rewards).

4) The DH/Pitcher issue "might" be an edge for the AL - but did not seem to be during the first 8 years of interleague play.  The disparity in interleague results is more closely associated with the implementation of the luxury tax, (and subsequent willingness of AL teams to pay it - and NL teams to not).

5) Despite the edge in interleague play, the NL and AL have split the last 8 WS even (4 each), even though the AL has begun benefitting from the All-Star game home field edge.

In looking at interleague records since its inception, the top and bottom teams are:

Yankees: 133-95; Twins 132-96; As 128-102; ChiSox 127-101; BoSox 127-102; Mariners 127-103; (Marlins are top NL team @ 120-99)

Pirates: 71-110; Cinci 83-104; DBacks 84-103; Brewers 84-100; Padres 88-121;  (Baltimore is worst AL team at 101-128);

The NL appears to have greater parity - Philly, Mets, Atlanta, Marlins all playoff teams during this span, as well as St. Louis, Chicago, Milwaukee and Houston.  In the West all 5 members have been to the playoffs at least once.  That is 13 different NL teams in the playoffs since interleague play began.  I think the AL has sent 10, (but I might've missed someone).

Ultimately, the salary suggestion is that the NL probably has just as many "top" talents as the AL - but they are simply spread out over more teams. 

One item of note -- the TWO (2) worst teams in interleague play in 2009 were Cleveland and Oakland, who both went 5-13.  Though this clouds the issue, too.  Because there were 4 NL teams that won only 5 games -- but they all went 5-10. 

My opinion:  Until MLB balances the leagues thru another expansion AND implements some form of hard salary cap, the current imbalance is likely to stay and/or get progressively worse.  The NL is going to continue having more sellers than buyers, and the likely long-term projections would suggest that the cost/benefit realities will likely make the problem worse.

 

 

SABR Matt's picture

The first thing you did was to replicate the existing research (yes...existing research) on payroll inequities.  We have indeed run those numbers.  If you take the Yankees and Red Sox out of the per-team payroll calculation, the AL and NL are nearly equal.  The problem is...the Yankees and Red Sox concentrate so many top talents that they force the rest of the AL to up their games and acquire less expensive free agents who can provide nearly the same level of production if they want to compete in the post-season.  The AL teams have to work harder because they are fighting the two juggernauts in baseball.

The interleague imbalances began with the rise of the Red Sox as a second payroll monster and as a world series winner.  I don't think that's a mistake or a coincidence.

Spectator's picture
Submitted by Spectator on

Your comment led me to reassess a draft pick that I had kind of dismissed as a lumbering RH hitter with not much Safeco future (I had visions of the sad, end-game Sexson).

But, here: http://mlb.mlb.com/media/video.jsp?content_id=4148223

And, here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3UqAmekHWLg

sure enough, he smokes the ball to right-center more than once.

42 walks and 42 xbh (25 HR) in 237 ABs vs. top-notch (SEC) NCAA opposition.

I know you're not so much into the draft/prospect bit, but just curious.

jemanji's picture
Submitted by jemanji on

We'll try to get a piece up on Poythress shortly.

Build and swing remind of Frank Thomas, who was also not the scouts' kind of player.

Spectator's picture
Submitted by Spectator on

These miss the one key fact, but they're impressive:

7/7  7.1IP  7H  2ER  0BB  7K

7/12  7.0IP  2H  0ER  1BB  4K

7/19  7.0IP  6H  2ER  0BB  9K

Key fact I haven't seen: is he back to hitting the low 90s?

Those are the last three Tacoma starts for one Ryan Rowland-Smith.

Spectator's picture
Submitted by Spectator on

At Lookout Landing:

"Turns out RRS was sitting at 88-91 again in his most recent start, that being the dominant game in Las Vegas. He's now back at his standard starting velocity and has racked up 34 strikeouts and six walks in 42.2 innings over his last seven starts."

At 90, Ryan ought to win the Vargas/Olson/RRS triangular.  Let's see what he can do in the bigs again. 

jemanji's picture
Submitted by jemanji on

The Ryan-Rowland Smith who first came up to the M's was hitting 92 regularly, and you could hear his curve snap in the air .... 9K's per 9 innings in Erik Bedard two-pitch fashion.

The arm got tired, the stuff got mushy, and it was a different conversation.

But get back to the fresh arm and of course he's the #4 SP.  Have seldom seen a pitcher who suffered so much from the loss of the oomph in his arm.  Joel Pineiro, maybe.

SABR Matt's picture

For a short time anyway, I could see RRS ripping through the league and posting a 7/3/1 TTO line and a 3.50 ERA or something like that.

Morrow's secondary pitches aren't quite there yet...he's working on stuff in AAA and the results were UGLY the first time out...I'm waiting for him to get hot before I start clamoring for his return.  Bargas can fillin as the #5 and Olson, whose stuff is well-suited to being a LOOGY - can take a bullpen spot away from Corcoran or replace Batista if/when he gets traded.

Leave a Reply

By submitting this form, you accept the Mollom privacy policy.