The days of watching Ted Williams in left are over. And the wondrous Willie Mays no longer wears his uniform. Time marches on. Transition is inevitable. With each passing day, the game of our youth moves further into history. But those vivid images that are so much a part of our life will always remain.

--"When It Was a Game"

Warren Edward Spahn passed away last week at the age of 82. Spahn was best known for winning 363 games, tied for the sixth most in the history of baseball and tops among southpaws.

In addition to being one of the top pitchers of all time, Spahn was a military hero who fought in the Battle of the Bulge in World War II and earned the Bronze Star and Purple Heart for being hit with shrapnel. Warren made his major league debut in 1942, then missed the following three years when he was drafted into the Army and assigned to the 176th Combat Engineers Battalion. Spahn participated in the taking of the key Rhine crossing bridge at Remagen, Germany. Several in his company lost their lives when the bridge finally collapsed. Spahn's bravery also won him a battlefield commission, extending his military service another six months and delaying his baseball career an additional three months until July 1946.

From Spahn's first full season in 1947 through his last great season in 1963, he finished in the top nine in wins in the National League every year and was in the top three 17 times. Spahn led the league in victories eight times, including five seasons in a row from 1957-1961.

Spahn also finished in the top eight in ERA in all but three of those years, having led the league three times in three different decades. Although Spahn never struck out 200 batters in a season, he led the league four years in a row from 1949-1952 (with a career high of 191 in 1950).

Although Spahn won just one Cy Young Award (in 1957), he arguably should be credited with five. Remember, the award itself wasn't even established until 1956, and it was only given to one pitcher in the entire major leagues until 1967. As such, one could easily make the case that Spahn deserved the Cy Young (had it been given out) in 1949 and 1953 when he finished seventh and fifth in the N.L. MVP voting, higher than any other pitcher. Spahn could also lay claim to the Cy Young in 1958 and 1961 when he came in second in the voting behind two A.L. pitchers (Bob Turley and Whitey Ford, respectively).

Career Totals:

	  IP     H     R    ER    BB    SO    W    L   PCT     ERA
Spahn 	5246  4830  2016  1798  1434  2583  363  245  .597    3.08
Lg Avg	5246  5190  2575  2269  1951  2725  292  292  .500    3.89

As shown, Spahn was better than the league average in every category except strikeouts. He had superior control, allowing substantially fewer walks, hit by pitches (42 vs. 108), and wild pitches (81 vs. 126) than the league average. Spahn also allowed fewer hits and home runs (434 vs. 499). Not surprisingly, the combination of fewer walks, hits, and home runs resulted in fewer runs and a vastly better ERA than the league average as well.

As great as Spahn's totals were, he "only" ranks 27th from 1900-on in career ERA as a percentage of the league ERA and 29th in terms of the absolute difference (among pitchers with at least 1500 innings pitched). Similarly, he ranks 38th and 41st, respectively, in baserunners per nine innings. By comparison, Pedro Martinez ranks first in all four measures. Spahn and Martinez are an interesting contrast. Spahn had good rate stats and great counting stats. Martinez has had good counting stats and great rate stats.

What really sets Spahn apart from Martinez and other more modern-day pitchers was his in-season and career durability. From 1947-1963, Spahn finished no worse than fourth in the N.L. in complete games every year. In fact, he led the league in CG for seven straight years from 1957-1963. Spahn's stamina and longevity is the primary reason why he ranks in the top ten in career totals from 1900-on in virtually every counting pitching statistic, including GS (9th), CG (5th), IP (6th), SHO (5th), and W (4th) as well as some of those one wouldn't put on a resume like H (5th), ER (8th), HR (6th), BB (10th), and L (T8th).

The Braves all-time great won 177 games after his 35th birthday, more than the career totals of Martinez and Curt Schilling and all but seven pitchers likely to be on an opening day roster in 2004. He also threw both of his no-hitters after the age of 39. Spahn pitched in the majors until 1965 when he was 44 years old, and he didn't leave gracefully, grumbling, "I didn't quit; baseball retired me." Spahn even pitched briefly in Mexico and in the minors for two years before finally giving it up for good.

Spahn holds the record for the most consecutive seasons facing 1,000 or more batters with 17--three more than his closest challenger (Christy Mathewson) and five more than third place (Walter Johnson).

MODERN BASEBALL HISTORY (1900-)
CONSECUTIVE SEASONS WITH BATTERS FACED >= 1000

1    Warren Spahn             1947-63   17   
2    Christy Mathewson        1901-14   14   
3    Walter Johnson           1908-19   12   
T4   Gaylord Perry            1966-76   11   
T4   Steve Carlton            1970-80   11   
T6   Cy Young                 1900-09   10   
T6   Robin Roberts            1950-59   10   
T6   Phil Niekro              1971-80   10   
T9   Vic Willis               1901-09    9   
T9   Carl Hubbell             1929-37    9   
T9   Bobo Newsom              1934-42    9   
T9   Bucky Walters            1936-44    9   
T9   Bob Friend               1956-64    9   
T9   Don Drysdale             1959-67    9   
T9   Jim Bunning              1959-67    9   
T9   Claude Osteen            1964-72    9   
T9   Mel Stottlemyre          1965-73    9   
T9   Ferguson Jenkins         1967-75    9

Incidentally, Roy Halladay was the only pitcher in the majors who faced 1,000 batters last year. Halladay faced 993 batters in 2002 so the longest active streak of 1,000 BFP is one.

Based on the changed landscape of the game (i.e., five-man rotations and pitch counts limiting starters to 100-120 per game), we are unlikely to witness a pitcher of Spahn's magnitude in terms of raw stats again. If Spahn wasn't one of a kind, he most certainly was the last of his kind.

Warren Spahn. Hall of Famer. Decorated World War II veteran. A hero between the lines. A hero outside the lines. America salutes you. You will be missed by us all.

Check back next weekend for an interview with Mike Carminati of Mike's Baseball Rants, who also has an in-depth review of Spahn's statistical achievements and rankings.

Permalink

I feel like an idiot. I write a whole article Friday devoted to the Marlins signings of Castillo and Lowell, which I heard were to be announced that day. Since, neither has been announced, although the Lowell extension looks true. But the Castillo signing his a snag when the Chicago Cubs came into the fight, along with the Mets matching the Marlins 4th year vesting option move. So, the price is being dragged up by the slappin' switch hitter, and will probably settle close to $6M per season. Wow.

Now I don't want to report something before it happens, again, but there is speculation (ESPN radio 1000 in Chicago) that the Brewers have traded Richie Sexson to the Diamondbacks for Junior Spivey, Craig Counsell, Lyle Overbay, and Chris Capuano. Here, to start, are some statistics, along with my comments:

Sexson: .272/.379/.548
Vs. RH: .271/.359/.545 Vs. LH: .279/.448/.557
Home: .257/.364/.521 Road: .287/.393/.574
Pre-ASB: .263/.376/.513 Post-ASB: .285/.383/.597
3-YR OPS: .889, .867, .927
Comments: Richie plays with power, and he has some of the top 5 power in the Majors. He's absolutely huge, although Sexson has made huge strides in defense the last few seasons. He probably will sit around .275 for his average, although he walks about 100 times per season and whiffs equally as much. He improved after the break and played better on the road, which is a good indicator for the D-Backs.

Spivey: .255/.326/.433
Vs. RH: .238/.305/.392 Vs. LH: .288/.366/.512
Home: .294/.347/.525 Road: .205/.301/.317
Pre-ASB: .255/.323/.441 Post-ASB: .255/.330/.422
Comments: Spivey's 2002 stats are misleading, as his first half was much different than his second, .966 vs. .763. So, for the last three halves, Spivey has been a .760 player, which is where his value stands. His OBP may rise to .380 at one point, although .430 is about his slugging high. So, the max for Spivey OPS in 2004 is .810, while .740 is about the low.

Counsell: .234/.328/.304 in 303AB
Vs. RH: .239/.336/.319 Vs. LH: .219/.301/.274
Home: .239/.339/.317 Road: .230/.317/.292
Pre-ASB: .268/.385/.373 Post-ASB: .205/.274/.242
Comments: I hate to pardon bad play, but much of Counsell's horrible season, including a disastrous second half, can be blamed on injury. He is very eligible for improvement next season, although topping .700 on the OPS chart may be unreasonable. He'll play shortstop for the Brewers, heating the position up for J.J. Hardy, although stealing time away from Bill Hall.

Overbay in MLB: .276/.365/.402 24XBH in 254AB
Overbay in AAA: .286/.419/.479 15XBH in 119AB
Comments: Overbay has been compared to Mark Grace before, as a high average, solid defensive, doubles power first basemen. Asking 20 home runs out of Overbay is unreasonable, although 30 doubles and 15 home runs isn't. He could hit .300 very soon, and has OF in his history. The Brewers are already moving former top prospect Brad Nelson to outfield, in preparation for Prince Fielder's arrival. Expect Overbay to play first until Fielder, and then to either move to the OF or be traded/non-tendered.

Capuano in MLB: 2-4 4.64 27/33 23/11
Capuano In AAA: 9-5 3.34 133/142.2 108/43
Comments: Capuano has little minor league experience, despite the fact he'll turn 25 after the break next season. He's only had 75 minor league starts, and nearly one-third of them came in 2003. He has a good curveball, and a fastball that sits around 90mph. He pitched better than his ERA indicates, and should be in the Milwaukee rotation next season.

For his slugging first basemen, Doug Melvin has nearly built himself an infield for 2004. CBS Sportsline doesn't have Spivey as arbitration-eligible, so I'm going to assume that is true and say he won't be traded this winter. The team will play Counsell at shortstop, meaning one-time prospect Bill Hall will have to take his .300OBP act elsewhere. Spivey gives the team an excuse to not play Rickie Weeks right away, which actually should help his development. Same holds true for SS prospect J.J. Hardy, who needs some time in AAA.

I think the team will trade Spivey during next season, about the team Weeks is ready to contribute. The $3.4M Counsell will stick around though, as his value is supposedly better than sabermatricians realize.

Actually, Melvin could field a lineup that looks like:

1. Scott Podsednik- CF
2. Junior Spivey- 2B
3. Geoff Jenkins- LF
4. Lyle Overbay- 1B
5. Wes Helms- 3B
6. Brady Clark- RF
7. ???- C
8. Craig Counsell- SS

He is in need of a shortstop and possibly a right fielder, although Clark showed flashes of brilliance last season. The team's rotation will have Sheets and Capuano, and probably Matt Kinney, Doug Davis, and Luis Martinez. God, they're bad. As for Arizona, they add a big bat for their lineup, and I imagine Brenly will field this lineup:

1. Matt Kata- 2B
2. Alex Cintron- SS
3. Luis Gonzalez- LF
4. Richie Sexson- 1B
5. Shea Hillenbrand- 3B
6. Steve Finley- CF
7. Danny Bautista- RF
8. Moeller/Barajas/Hammock- C

Not a bad lineup, considering the successes of Kata, Cintron, and Hillenbrand. The rotation is a big question in Arizona, but I think Johnson, Webb, Fossum, De La Rosa, and a combination of Good, Patterson, or Edgar Gonzalez will claim the final slot. The team will realize Fossum is cut out for the bullpen about the same time that Mike Gosling bounces back from a disappointing season in the Pacific Coast League.

Overall, not a bad trade for both teams, although this is a nice move for the Diamondbacks after dealing away their ace. By taking out Counsell and adding Sexson, the team will pay Richie about $4.85M in 2004, which is quite a bargain. The team also lost $12M with Schilling, putting the team currently on the hook for about $58.4M, when considering the arbitration-eligible players. That gives Garigiola $8-11M to spend, although I don't really see where the work will be done. Maybe the team will move to sign Miguel Batista, which is the smartest option at this point.

Not bad for a weekend post, huh?

Permalink

According to this column in the Florida Sun-Sentinal, the Marlins will announce the re-signings of Luis Castillo and Mike Lowell as early as today. According to Mike Berardino, Castillo will sign a three-year deal woth $15.5M, with a $6M option that could vest by plate appearances. Lowell's extension will be a four-year contract, believed to be in the $36-40M range. For the purposes of this column, I'm going to assume Lowell makes $9.5M in 2004, which would fall right in the middle of that range.

Before digging deeper into the Marlins, let's look at Lowell and Castillo splits:

Lowell Overall: .276/.350/.530
Vs. RH: .271/.346/.484 Vs. LH: .295/.363/.688
At Home: .282/.365/.509 Road: .271/.336/.550
Pre-ASB: .275/.351/.586 Post-ASB: .281/.348/.388

Castillo Overall: .314/.381/.397
Vs. RH: .312/.377/.357 Vs. LH: .320/.394/.494
At Home: .326/.398/.406 Road: .303/.365/.388
Pre-ASB: .311/.375/.407 Post-ASB: .320/.390/.382

Lowell's second half numbers look very shaky because he was injured, the sole reasoning his power went away completely. His OPS has increased each of the last three seasons, and he is likely to break .900 next season. Castillo has started striking out less, but he needs to improve his baserunning abilities to be top-notch. He fits very well in that second hole, and Fox documented the importance Pierre and Castillo played on the Marlins last season. I believe a large part of these signings were to draw a crowd to Miami, bringing back popular, Latino players to satisfy Miami's largest demographic.

Berardino also writes the team will non-tender both Juan Encarnacion and Braden Looper, assuming trades can not be worked out beforehand. But by this news going public, Larry Beinfest has lost any potential market he was hoping to harbor with these two. So using the information I presented this week, I can assume the following:

Signed for 2004: Juan Pierre (2.3), Mike Hampton (10), Mike Lowell (9.5), Luis Castillo (5.5)

Arbitration-Eligible: Brad Penny (2.5), Mark Redman (3), A.J. Burnett (2.5), Gonzalez (2.7)

Currently on the hook for: $38M

Last season's Opening Day payroll was a shade over $50M, and my belief is the team will allow Beinfest to reach $55M in 2004. After assuming $4M is spent on auto-renewals, the team will have $42M spent on next season's team. That would allow Beinfest to spend roughly $13M towards next season's team. Let's look at what kind of team the World Champion's will trot out there:

1. Pierre- CF
2. Castillo- 2B
3. Lowell- 3B
4. Cabrera- RF
5. Conine-LF
6. Choi- 1B
7. Gonzalez- SS
8. Castro/?- C

Ivan Rodriguez is the largest question mark this team has, but that question will be answered in the next ten days. Last season Rodriguez stipulated the team could not offer him arbitration this season, meaning if the team doesn't sign him by December 7th, he will be lost. Pudge was the heart and soul of last year's team, and the most popular Latino player of all. Beinfest and Boras are millions of miles apart, but as I said, all will be known a week from Sunday. Here's a look at the rotation:

1. Beckett- RH
2. Pavano- RH
3. Redman- LH
4. Willis- LH
5. Penny- RH

The team will expect A.J. Burnett back early in the season, although I can't say I expect Pavano, Redman, Penny, and Burnett to all be Marlins next season. One will be either dealt or non-tendered, and that will be seen on December 20. Berardino hints that Mark Redman will be the player to go if Pudge is signed, but if the team is forced to go with Ramon Castro, that rotation above stays.

Jack McKeon's bullpen has many questions within itself, and those will grow when Looper is non-tendered. The team will probably look for one-time studs like Blaine Neal and Tim Spooneybarger to step up, along with a couple veterans they sign. Berardino says the team is closing in on Chad Fox, and is looking to add another reliever (a former closer of some type) after that. I would advise Mike Williams, who is only one season removed from 40 saves. Armando Almanza and Michael Tejera are two more, and I imagine someone of the Tommy Phelps or Allan Levrault variety.

Florida is trying desperately to avoid the 1997 sell-out logo, and will spend $15M next season (Castillo and Lowell) to prove it. Lowell will be able to escape his deal if Miami doesn't get a new stadium deal, and Florida is trying to buy their stadium on payroll. I fully expect Beinfest to realize Pudge's importance (along with Pudge seeing he has no market) and the two sides coming together for a deal. When that happens, the NL East is still wide open, although the Phillies are the favorites in 2004.

2004 favorites (assuming Schilling is in Boston): Phillies, Cubs, Padres, Red Sox, Royals/Twins, A's

Have a good weekend, check back if something worthy of posting happens. And, make your way over to Rich's Weekend Baseball BEAT to see an exclusive interview with injury guru and fellow blogger, Will Carroll.

Permalink

Will Carroll has catapulted himself into the big leagues of off-the-field baseball personalities during the past year. The multi-talented Carroll is an author with Baseball Prospectus, a host of Baseball Prospectus Radio, and the proprietor of the Will Carroll Weblog. His Under The Knife column, which is available to BP Premium subscribers, appears at least four times per week during the season. It is a must read for those of us who like to be on the cutting edge when it comes to injuries and potential health risks as well. BP Radio is a weekly one-hour radio show, and it is currently carried by 13 stations around the country.

Baseball Prospectus is one of the four most important sources of information (along with Baseball-Reference.com, ESPN.com, and the Sabermetric Baseball Encyclopedia) for Rich's Weekend Baseball BEAT. I am a BP Premium subscriber and found it so useful this past season that I recently re-upped for another two years.

I had the honor of interviewing Will during the past week in my ongoing off-season series of discussions with baseball's top online writers, analysts, and bloggers. Not surprisingly, Will gives us his valuable opinions without holding anything back. Pull up a chair and listen in.

RWBB: I'm curious. Are you an MD?

Will: That's probably the most common question I'm asked. I am not a physician, nor medical professional of any type. I have a background in sports medicine, but I am not a certified athletic trainer.

The next question I generally get is the following: "If you're not a doctor, why should I listen to you?" I figured out the answer after about a hundred failed attempts. I'm a translator and a pattern recognizer. If you have a medical background, you'll understand what a Grade II+ medial collateral sprain with meniscal involvement means without me. If you're a baseball fan, you know who B.J. Surhoff is. If you're not both--and who is, really?--then you're missing half the picture. I sit in the middle, trying to give my readers as much overlap as I can. Without talking down to anyone, I can usually translate the medical info into a baseball context and the baseball info into a medical context. I take what the medical professionals do and try to make it mean something to the BP reader, which is at a pretty high level to begin with. If I can do it in an entertaining fashion, it's all the better.

RWBB: When did you become interested in sports medicine?

Will: Birth. My father is in the field. I can remember seeing him work on Jimmy Connors or Andy Brown when I was four years old. (Brown was the last hockey goalie not to wear a mask. Does that sound like a good idea? "Mask? Nah, I can dodge those pucks.") If he'd been a shoe salesman, maybe I'd know shoes. My interest in the field has come and gone, but it's always been about a basic understanding of the athlete and what they go through.

RWBB: What prompted you to begin writing your Under The Knife column?

Will: I just thought I could add something to the conversation. I didn't think sports medicine was getting enough coverage--and still don't--and had just enough coffee in me to think I could do it. I was working on my novel--still unfinished--regarding a fictional Steve Dalkowski and, well, it's still sitting there, the third book on my "to do" list. I sent my first email to three guys, who all gave great feedback. I think the biggest inspiration was Lee Sinins. He was one of the "original three" and his links made me. It went from three to three thousand in a hurry, so a lot more people wanted this kind of stuff than I thought.

RWBB: How did you get hooked up with Baseball Prospectus?

Will: I had read BP since 1998 when Rob Miller (another one of the "original three") told me I had to read this book. He had kicked my head in two years running in our Front Office Baseball league, so I figured I'd better read it. It turned what I knew about baseball on its head, and it was exceptionally well written. I didn't understand the math--and still don't--but, wow, it was life changing.

Later on, Gary Huckabay sent me an instant message one day and asked if I'd like to write a piece for BP 2003. I was flattered and stunned and said yes way too fast. I got to know Joe Sheehan a bit and had corresponded with a couple other BPers and when I was asked to become part of the big Premium move, how could I say no? It's like the kid from the farm getting a call telling him he was going to play in Yankee Stadium. BP is the Yankees of baseball writing and I'm proud to wear pinstripes.

RWBB: You're of the belief that injuries are the hidden frontier of baseball knowledge. Please explain.

Will: I need more coffee for this one. Injuries have always been looked upon as something that just happens--tragedy, accident, darned shame. Or they become a destiny, like injury-prone, star-crossed, or worse, "might have been." No one, including MLB, took a serious look at what damage was being done to the game in any holistic sense. There were parts out there--Keith and Rany's PAP, MLB's "Redbook," the work Glenn Fleisig is doing--but there was no one place that tried to put it all together and make injuries a part of a baseball discussion. That's my goal; that and giving the guys behind the scenes in sports med some credit.

J.D. Drew, a good player? Can you answer that without discussing injuries? How did Rickey Henderson or Roger Clemens stay healthy for so long? (For both, it's one simple common thing.) Why did this guy come back so soon and this guy had the same injury and is still out? The paper said four to six weeks. Which is it and why? If my ace goes down with a blown cuff, how does it hurt my team and could we have prevented it?

Endless questions, but when I see someone drop a med head phrase in a column, I just love it. We don't see guys saying, "Damn, he's hurt" anymore. The smart ones are asking good questions now--or coming to me.

RWBB: Do you believe that baseball injuries can become a transparent statistical class like on base percentage and park factors?

Will: Darn good question. We don't have the stats to work with right now. I work from anecdotal evidence and the experience of the people that share their knowledge with me. The Redbook is amazing, but it's mostly raw data with some suggestions made in an actuarial sense. Good first step, but even people in the front offices of very smart teams didn't know what it was or have access to it. I think there will be "counting" stats like DL days and "derived" stats like DL Days over the average for this injury. There will probably be calculated stats, too. I'm toying with a formula that tries to approximate an injury percentage, but Nate Silver's way ahead of me with PECOTA's attrition rate. I used a simplified version this year on the Team Health Reports and it worked very, very well. Red Lights (the highest risk category) were 89% more likely to have a significant injury than an average player. We're working on seeing if DL days or DL dollars is a better measure, but the preliminary results are encouraging.

RWBB: Are teams generally aware as to the number of days lost or amount of payroll lost to injuries?

Will: In the broad sense, no. I'm sure they have it in a spreadsheet somewhere, but there are few GMs that could pop that out. They could say, "Damn, we're awfully banged up" or something, but there are few that really look at it and fewer that seem to do anything about it. San Francisco and Cleveland are really in the forefront with data, and New York has a secret weapon down in Tampa.

I only know of two teams that really take injury prevention seriously. All teams say they want fewer injuries but not many have a real plan for doing anything about it. It wouldn't be that hard to do. Heck, give me 1% of the money I save a team (and the right to hire the head trainer), and I'll do it for no salary. When you look at how teams fall apart due to injuries--the A's, the Cubs--or don't, in the case of the Marlins this season, it's a wonder that it's not more of a focus.

There are some really good teams, a lot of average teams, and a few teams that are about a half step shy of just saying, "Rub some dirt on it."

RWBB: You recently reached an agreement in principle to write a book this off-season on pitcher injuries. Give us a sneak preview of your work.

Will: Hell, I signed a contract and everything. The book is an amalgamation of the knowledge that's out there about pitching health. From mechanics to medicine, from surgery to stretching, I'm going to give both a broad overview and some deep insight. Well, that's the goal. Like UTK, it's just filling a niche. There's nothing out there like it, so I might as well write it.

It even has a title, "Saving The Pitcher." I'm really excited about the project because I'm working with some great people on it. That's something of a theme of my writing existence and even the radio show. It's the people I meet and get to know in the course of my job that makes it so amazing. If you'd told me a couple years ago that Nate Silver and I would walk up and talk to Rickey Henderson or that I'd interview Scott Boras or that I would stand on the field at Wrigley next to Ryne Sandberg, I would have laughed. If you told me I'd be writing full time, I wouldn't have believed you. I'm the luckiest boy in the world!

RWBB: When will "Saving The Pitcher" be published and by whom?

Will: I don't have a firm date for you, but Ivan R. Dee will publish it in the spring. It should be a few months behind BP 2004 and the new Neyer/James book on pitching, so budget accordingly. Some people think the Neyer/James book is competition, but if what I hear about it is true, they will actually be very complementary.

RWBB: What is your position on the significance of pitch counts and stress rates?

Will: It's all in the book but, until then, pitch counts are a decent measure. If you don't have a radar gun or a good knowledge of pitching mechanics, pitch counts aren't bad. You know where pitch counts would make the most difference? Little League. We kill these kids and then keep on riding the best ones in high school and college. Kerry Wood didn't have surgery because of being overworked as a rookie, though that didn't help. All the mileage he had on that arm built up and...pow...it was almost gone, if not for a miracle of surgery that's near common today.

RWBB: How do you feel about Pitcher Abuse Points?

Will: I wrote an article a long time ago attacking PAP and that was pretty dumb. PAP is, without a doubt, meaningful and the best system available today for measuring pitcher workload. It's pretty technical, which is a downside, and doesn't tell us much in a particular game, but it's definitely a great tool and, more importantly, a big step forward for the science of pitching.

My work on Velocity Loss is preliminary. It's promising but preliminary. Data collection is the big problem there. Until V-Loss is proven or not proven, it's my pet. Either way, PAP is the big dog on the porch and, in most long-horizon analysis, the best tool period.

RWBB: Which factors are the most relevant when forecasting the likelihood of injuries to pitchers in the future--age, pitcher type, mechanics, or overuse?

Will: All of the above? I think it's some combination of those. Mechanics are probably the most important. Mike Marshall's work with high speed films makes that point. If everyone could do what he teaches, I'd have nothing to write about other than Kaz Ishii taking one off his dome or that Barry Zito has calluses from his pre-game workout. Age is a big factor. Randy Johnson can do what Jerome Williams shouldn't do. Type is an interesting one. It's very subjective, but if we can find patterns, that's valuable. The Neyer/James book intrigues me greatly because what they're doing in categorizing pitchers may give me things to work with.

One or two other things that aren't often mentioned (outside of my upcoming book, of course) are that most pitchers are in terrible physical condition for pitching and that most pitchers don't throw enough.

RWBB: Name two or three pitchers who you believe could experience serious arm troubles next season?

Will: Arm only? Wow, I would have guessed Roy Oswalt last year, but his groin broke first. He's a good candidate again this year. He'll need to really concentrate on his mechanics and he's never been great at that. Houston has a problem keeping pitchers healthy in general so I worry a bit about Brandon Duckworth heading down there. I'm a bit worried about Josh Fogg's mechanics near the end of 2003. Would Kaz Ishii surprise anyone? Dewon Brazelton? I'm not worried about any of the Cubs pitchers, surprisingly. It hasn't caught up to them yet.

RWBB: In one of your recent articles, you mentioned Chan Ho Park as an early "breakout" candidate for 2004. Did you mean "breakout" or "breakdown?"

(Laughs.)

Will: Breakout. I mean, what's it take for him to look way better than last year or even 2002? Not much. What's he look like if he has 10 wins? Comeback player of the year? Here's a guy who had the bad luck of a horrid contract and the worst pitching coach imaginable for him all at once. There's enough left there, he's got the right people working around him, and he's a low risk pick at the right spot. The problem is, the Rangers aren't paying him like the White Sox did with Esteban Loaiza. Instead, they're paying him the GNP of an industrialized nation.

RWBB: That's for sure. Do you think teams are finally learning not to pay pitchers so much or not to give them such long contracts?

Will: I think in general teams are starting to notice that they can't insure contracts beyond three years and that certainly got their attention. I think it was Joe Sheehan that I was talking to about this, but he was telling me just how risk averse most teams are in their decisions and it's true, most teams don't go too far out on the limb for anything. That risk aversion permeates baseball. It's why we see the same old managers, why you get long term contracts for 'proven veterans' and why young guys have to fight so hard to make it.

Pitching is almost literally a coinflip proposition, injury-wise. Just over half of all pitchers will be on the DL at some point in a three-year period and some of those will be serious--elbow reconstruction, torn labrum. Rotator cuff injuries are way down, but tendonitis is up. Baseball's going to need to get a lot smarter on how to value players, especially pitchers. I'd pay for greatness and I'd pay for consistency. The rest seems replaceable to me. Granted, if I were running a team, I'd have a four man rotation, a thin bullpen, and...well, if I were running a team I'd be smart enough to get people around me that knew a lot more about this than me and I'd defer to them.

RWBB: How can the union and the owners work together to restore credibility on issues such as the use of steroids and other supplements or enhancements?

Will: Man, this would take a long time to answer plus I'm working on an upcoming piece for BP, so I hesitate to give an important but overblown issue short shrift. The MLBPA and the owners could implement a world-class drug testing policy much like those in place for Olympic sports. Perfect? No. Good for the sport? Not sure. Steroids are not the issue people make them out to be in paranoid, reactionary columns. If Ken Caminiti came on SportsCenter and said, "Five percent of baseball players are on steroids", would anyone freak out? If Jose Canseco said, "I know there are 82 players on the juice," would anyone buy his book? Maybe some of them used THG or another drug. Maybe some took hGH or used testosterone gel. I'd rather have drugs out of the game, but I don't think it's making a mockery of history either. If you take out steroids, do you take out creatine? If you take out hormones, do you take out protein shakes? There are all kinds of mines in this field--privacy issues, accuracy, false positives, etc.

One thing I do know. I would not want to be the first guy that tests positive. Counseling might not sound like a penalty--and it's not--but that guy is going to take some abuse in the press and on the field. Sadly, it's more likely to be a guy who's trying to be the next Scott Podsednik rather than the next Barry Bonds.

RWBB: How about the Bay Area Laboratory Co-operative?

Will: BALCO? I'm not touching that until the grand jury is done. But remember, gossip isn't guilt and America is built on innocent until proven guilty--no matter what they're doing in Gitmo.

RWBB: Do you still stand by the exclusive story you broke for Baseball Prospectus last August that Pete Rose and MLB have reached an agreement allowing Rose to return to baseball in 2004?

Will: Absolutely. Unequivocally. What people forget is what we put on the line for that story. We'd have to be blithering morons to put ourselves so far out there without rock-solid evidence. It's a failing of me as a journalist that I didn't do some simple things at the very start, when the story was falling into my lap, that would have made this easier, but live and learn. I'm not a professional journalist any more than I'm an orthopedic surgeon.

Actually, the question as asked is off slightly from what we reported, but that's semantics. The basic point of the story is that Pete Rose will be back and yes, that will happen. If Bud's waiting me out, seeing if he can bring back the panic attacks, tell him he wins!

RWBB: You were expecting an announcement regarding Rose's reinstatement in late November. Why hasn't something been released yet?

Will: Bud and MLB will do this on their own time, for their own reasons. Since the story broke, people have pointed to the post-awards, pre-Winter Meetings period as the most likely. The announcement is still something MLB controls completely, so they'll do it when everything is right. John Erardi at the Cincy Enquirer thinks it will be early 2004 and he's done a great job following this.

RWBB: Do you think Rose will ever admit his wrongdoings?

Will: Someone close to Pete said recently, "What makes you think he hasn't?" Baseball's never been an organization that does things in broad daylight. Our original report said that Pete wasn't going to be asked to make a public admission of wrongdoing. He came pretty darn close in a recent TV interview. People overwhelmingly want him back in the game, with or without the admission, so even getting close is going to push that popularity higher. I'm guessing here, but I think he'll sign something and Bud will wave the document at the press conference, but we'll never see it. "Pete has met my conditions for reinstatement," he'll say. For most fans, that will be more than enough.

RWBB: Rose has already missed the mid-November cutoff to be included in next year's Hall of Fame balloting, reducing his window of eligibility for his election by the BBWAA to just one year. Is that correct?

Will: There's some debate on that but, by the rules I've seen and the people I've spoken to, you're correct. Someone told me it would have been a bad idea and hell on Pete's ego if he'd missed the Hall on a vote, but just think about this - let's say he's back in baseball and you see him at games and on the field. He's working with kids, he's keeping his nose clean, and he's being an ambassador for the game. Give him a year of that and people will be so used to seeing him in the game rather that out of the game that it will seem a lot more natural to think of him in the Hall.

Besides that, the Hall is pretty bogus. Hell of an honor, but if they wanted to futz with the rules to get Pete in, who will stop them?

RWBB: If Rose is elected to the Hall of Fame, do you think any of the 59 living members would boycott his induction ceremonies?

Will: I honestly have no idea. Maybe one or two. If Joe Morgan, Johnny Bench, and Mike Schmidt are standing up there with him, do you think anyone will care if someone like Bob Feller isn't?

RWBB: Are you planning on attending the Winter Meetings in New Orleans on December 12-14?

Will: I'll be there with bells on. Well, not bells. That really isn't something that I would normally wear, especially in New Orleans. My business is based on talking to people, so when all of those people are in one place, I'd be a fool not to be there. I wish I had the freedom to be at the GM meetings, the owners meetings, and so on, but the Winter Meetings are still kind of Baseballapalooza.

Plus, New Orleans...that has to be better than Nashville and I had a blast in Nashville. Stand in a bar and there's Gammons over there and Cashman right there and...man, it goes on and on. It's mostly standing around and drinking and waiting, really. All the action goes on behind the scenes and Peter will beat me to all the good stuff!

RWBB: What can baseball fans expect from these meetings?

Will: I'd imagine it will be a lot like last year. The Expos are holding the game hostage since Vladimir Guerrero will set the market. We'll see one or two big deals, several minor ones, and signings of big but not huge names. The non-tender situation is what throws everything we think we know off. If we come out of these meetings with no major deals, then the collusion talk gets really loud and ESPN will start putting a microphone in Frank Coonelly's face.

RWBB: Who do you talk to on a regular basis to exchange information?

Will: You're kidding right? Name my sources? Not in a million years!

(Laughs.)

Oh, you mean people I speak to and respect their work? I speak with players, agents, doctors, clubbies, GMs, stat guys, fans that sit in the stands, and a guy that lives really close to the Yankees minor league facilities that owns a camcorder with the longest lens imaginable.

I speak with a lot of writers and I'm honored that people like Peter Gammons, Jayson Stark, and Rob Neyer read my stuff. I read as much as possible, but there's just so much junk out there. There are a really small number of really good writers in any medium. For every Stephanie Myles, there's someone on a beat that doesn't ask good questions. For every Matthew Leach, there's someone that toes the party line too closely. For every Alex Belth or Christian Ruzich, there's ten blogs by a guy who puts ketchup on hot dogs and moves his lips when he reads.

RWBB: I like my hot dogs plain.

Will: Same here. I always end up with something on my shirt otherwise! But seriously, there's not many consistently good writers out there. It's an issue that comes up because the Internet is finally starting to be taken seriously from a credibility standpoint. The BBWAA is debating allowing net based writers to join, but how do you set the conditions? How long would someone have to write and in what type of medium? Don't get me wrong, there's good writers out there and more coming, I hope. There's also a lot of noise, but everyone deserves to have a voice and that's the interesting thing for me. Teams should be grasping this and learning that they should be managing their communities better. Teams still think far too locally.

RWBB: Which teams have the best trainers and team doctors?

Will: No team has a bad staff. Some have bad results, but they're all qualified, hard working people that do their best. People get weeded out when they can't do the job to the level that is expected, or just by bad luck. Stan Conte is the class of the field, but he had a fluky bad year in 2003 (yet the team still won). Dave Tumbas, Sean Cunningham, Ron McClain, Jamie Reed, and Jim Rowe come to mind, but there are just as many deserving assistants, too, like the now-retired Barney Nugent, Paul Anderson, Chris Correnti, or Lonnie Soloff. Heck, Dave Tumbas just got let go by the Cubs in a move that really surprised me.

Doctors? Well, you probably know the big names. Andrews, Yocum, Kremchek, Conway, and Hawkins. The teams that are good integrate it all. They give the medical staff a say in personnel and in game decisions. Not overruling but just having a voice. Some trainers can say that a pitcher shouldn't go out and the manager will listen. Some doctors will say that a player shouldn't be signed. Very few teams do integration well.

RWBB: Which teams have the best facilities?

Will: All are pretty good and they have access to better. The newer facilities have a big advantage of course. San Fran and Cincy are world class.

RWBB: Other than injuries, what proprietary baseball knowledge is still inefficiently valued?

Will: Lots. More than lots. How do we value anything? We can't even agree on what "value" is! The lesson of Moneyball is that baseball is a very inefficient market. We don't have a great grasp on defense and what work is being done is such high level stuff that it will be years before it trickles down in a usable form.

RWBB: As a Chicago Cubs fan, what would you like to see Jim Hendry do this off-season and Dusty Baker do next season?

Will: First, I'd get a bench coach with a strong talent for game strategy. Dusty runs a great clubhouse, but he's been out managed and he runs a crap staff. I'd hire Tom House as pitching coach. Not that Larry Rothschild is bad, but Tom's better and has a relationship with Mark Prior. I'd try to convince Rickey Henderson that he'd be the best first base coach of all time. I'd try and work a deal for Alex Rodriguez. The Cubs are one of few teams that could absorb that contract. Maybe deal Kerry Wood, Juan Cruz, and a minor league pitcher, plus Alex Gonzalez.

I'd also like to get one more consistent arm in the pen and a new second baseman, maybe Fernando Vina. He's not my ideal, but he would fit in well, is an upgrade on Grudz, and he's got the proven veteran facial hair.

RWBB: Trading Hee Seop Choi for Derrek Lee seems right up Dusty Baker's alley.

Will: Very much so. My reaction to the deal was a four-letter word. Still, I like Lee a lot more than I would have liked J.T. Snow or Rafael Palmeiro and his subliminal big black bat. I mean, does Viagra really think we don't get that message? Lee is a solid player who's probably slightly overpaid, but will fit right in. His father was with the organization and actually was the one that signed Choi, if I remember correctly. More than anything this deal really makes me re-think Larry Beinfest. He may really "get it" more than I thought.

RWBB: I agree although Marlins followers and mainstream baseball fans may view the trade as nothing more than an opportunity to dump salary. I don't see it that way myself.

Will: No, it's a good trade that happens to clear up some salary space. It will be interesting to see if the Marlins stick with their plan--and they had one--or if they really are the next Angels. Building around batting average is tough and they're going to lose several of their important pieces. Not sewing up Pudge quickly is the most surprising part of the early Hot Stove for me.

RWBB: Combining the Cubs and Baseball Prospectus Radio for a minute, what was it like to have Ron Santo as a guest on your radio show?

Will: Interviewing Santo was one of the highlights of the year. Sure, I turned into a fan during the interview, but man, why is he not in the Hall. I said it was bogus and here's one of the reasons why. Did you see the ceremonies where the Cubs retired his number? Here's a guy that's lost his legs, facing bladder surgery in days, they screwed him out of the Hall earlier in the year and all he wants to do is thank everyone for letting him be a Cub. Every team needs a Ron Santo, someone who is as good a human being as they are a player, someone that reminds you that "love of the game" isn't just an empty phrase.

RWBB: Speaking of the Hall of Fame, how do you feel about Ryne Sandberg?

Will: Sandberg is my childhood hero. How is he not a first ballot guy? I don't know, but I'm not rational about Ryno. Lee Smith got hosed, too. He should be in.

RWBB: I believe Santo and Sandberg are worthy of enshrinement, but I'm far from convinced when it comes to Smith. In my mind, he was a good relief pitcher who just happened to come along at the right time to get the maximum benefit from the so-called "save" stat.

Will: I think our valuation of relievers is too high in-season and too low when we're looking at their careers. It's odd to see the disconnect, but I think we'll have a sea change soon. Dennis Eckersley is coming up and he had such a singular career that it may force people to change how they look at it. He was a pretty good starter, but not great. He was a great closer, but not for long enough to match someone like Smith. If you put Eck in the Hall, then I think you have to start taking a harder look at relievers. I agree, the save stat alone shouldn't be putting these guys in. But just like Eric Gagne winning the Cy Young this season, some of these guys--the top ones like Smith--deserve recognition. We can't fault them their role or era that they played in. That was management. They were given the chance to play and they did very well. We're also going to see more and more guys of this era coming eligible without some of those 'magic numbers' like 300 wins and some of those magic numbers get altered by era. Is 500 homers magic? The game is always changing. God, I love it. When do pitchers and catchers report?

RWBB: Not soon enough, Will. Thanks for your time and hard-hitting answers.

Next week: Mike Carminati of the ever popular Mike's Baseball Rants will be in the hot seat. Expect a question or two about Joe Morgan.

Permalink

Happy Thanksgiving, hope everyone has a great day of festivities, and (for once), football. Today's column is filled with rumors and signings, kind of like a Friday column normally would be. But I'll have more substantial material tomorrow, so check back then. First off, let's please the Kansas City fans...

Allan Baird re-signed a triplet of Royals yesterday, and as usual, I'll throw some splits your way before analyzing...

Brian Anderson statistics:

Overall: 14-11 3.78 212/197.2 87/43
With Royals: 5-1 3.99 50/49.2 15/11
In Kauffman: 3-1 6.53 36/30.1 11/6
Before Break: 7-6 4.13 120/104.2 39/21
After Break: 7-5 3.39 92/93 48/22

Joe Randa stats:

Overall: .291/.348/.452
Vs. RH: .282/.345/.433 Vs. LH: .311/.356/.497
Home: .286/.357/.478 Away: .295/.341/.432
Pre-ASB: .248/.304/.414 Post-ASB: .344/.402/.500

Curt Leskanic splits:

Overall: 5-0 2.22 38/52.2 50/29
With Royals: 1.73 16/26 22/11
Vs. RH: .228/.319/.356 Vs. LH: .176/.307/.247

Anderson will make $3.25M the next two seasons, Randa will make a hefty $3.75M next year, and Leskanic will earn $1.5M. In total, the Royals spent $8.5M towards their 2004 team, landing them at $31.4M so far, by my calculations. OK, here's what I know about the pitching staff next season:

1. Brian Anderson
2. Runelvys Hernandez
3. Darrell May
4. Kevin Appier
5. Gobble vs. Asencio vs. Snyder

Not bad, and so far the bullpen has Leskanic, Nate Field, Mike MacDougal, Jeremy Affeldt, D.J. Carrasco, and possibly Kris Wilson. I believe Affeldt has huge potential out of the 'pen, able to pitch in any role necessary. He can go long relief, middle relief, close, and come in to get lefties out. Leskanic can get right-handers out, but MacDougal actually showed a huge reverse platoon split. Signing one more right-hander, possibly Al Levine, is a possibility.

Randa will likely be one of two veterans signed, and I've made it no secret what I believe this team should do. My vote would be to put DeJesus and Guiel on the outfield corners, and sign Javy Lopez with the remaining money. That would give a very good lineup of:

1. David DeJesus- LF
2. Joe Randa- 3B
3. Mike Sweeney- 1B
4. Carlos Beltran- CF
5. Javy Lopez- C
6. Ken Harvey- DH
7. Angel Berroa- SS
8. Aaron Guiel- RF
9. Desi Relaford- 2B

That's a very good lineup, with even more potential. If Randa hits like he did in the second half, and Lopez was to continue his tear, they would have one of the more formidable offenses in baseball. DeJesus would switch with Guiel if he struggled, and Ken Harvey and Angel Berroa are likely to further improve next season. It's looking good in Kansas City, especially when considering the hits Minnesota and Chicago have taken thus far.

And after that rant, I'd like to briefly mention that Mark Kotsay is officially an A, while Sandy Alomar Jr. re-signed with the Chicago White Sox. I already wrote about Kotsay, and the 150AB that Alomar will steal from Miguel Olivo isn't substantial enough for me to spend time writing about. So, onto the rumors:

- Kaz Matsui has announced he is more than willing to change positions, which will officially count the Yankees in for negotiations. The Yankees are hoping to bring Matsui in to play second, and move Soriano to center. Bernie Williams would shift to DH, and Nick Johnson would then be featured in a deal for Javier Vazquez.

But, I must say I don't believe Matsui is as open as he is saying, I mean, he was voted best Japanese shortstop of all-time last season. He is fantastic on defense, and is probably using the Yankees to drive his price up. Ultimately, the Dodgers or Mariners will sign him, with emphasis on the latter. That leaves the Yankees with one other second base option...

- Luis Castillo is sitting in a very comfortable position, in the driver's seat with two very nice offers on the table. And yes, more are to come. Castillo was first offered a three year, $15.5M extension by the Marlins, to which he gave the response, "Let's wait and see." The Mets, according to the New York Post, countered with an offer in the $14M range over three seasons, apparently asking Castillo to ditch Miami to play in New York (for less money).

But, if Matsui turns the Yankees down, they're likely to go after Castillo, and the Red Sox and Cubs are supposedly interested as well. If Castillo plays his cards right, we could be talking $7M per for a sound defensive, light hitting second basemen. Let me just say I hardly advocate the signing of Castillo for the Cubs, as other options (Aurilia, Grudzi, Durham, Walker) would be more fiscally/statistically sound for this team.

- The Cubs are said to be one of the teams interested in Keith Foulke, the 'mystery' team of the bidding process. Foulke has received a four-year offer from the Red Sox, but will wait to hear offers from Oakland, New York, and Chicago. Keith isn't said to be interested in the Mets, as he wants to be pitching for a contender. Who knows how far the Cubs will go, as they are interested in three other pitchers as closers. Who?

- Tom Gordon, Rod Beck, and Ugueth Urbina are all expected to hear offers from the Cubs, all to take over Joe Borowski's job as closer. Borowski would then move to middle relief, where I believe he is much better suited. Gordon is drawing a ton of interest from the Devil Rays, Urbina will probably end up with the Mets, and Rod Beck remains a wild card. If the Cubs miss out on Foulke and Gordon, expect them to jump all over Beck. If the A's miss out on Foulke, I expect them to be interested in Rod. Funny, I haven't heard LaTroy Hawkins' name in weeks.

- No real news on Curt Schilling, as Epstein and Lucchino appear to be trying to keep the deal hush-hush. If Schilling doesn't get a three-year offer from Boston, he will spurn them and stay in Arizona. If he does, Boston will have an amazing rotation, and Richie Sexson will be a Diamondback next week...

That's all for today, I just can't stomach to write more. OK, I can't write puns. Dammit, see ya tomorrow.

Permalink

Yesterday, Aaron Gleeman introduced a new stat of his, entitled "Gleeman Production Average," which is a more advanced statistic than OPS. He is trying to weigh on-base percentage and slugging percentage equally, basically by multiplying OBP by 1.8. He then divides by four, and you have a number synonomous to batting average. It's a good attempt, but if he calls it GPA, then multiplying his final number by 10 would give you a school-like GPA. Barry Bonds would have a 4.25, which makes a lot more sense. That came from a thread on Baseball Primer, during which I spent half my afternoon talking on. Between Gleeman, Patel, and Pinto's statistics, it's definitely a sabermatrician winter.

Then, news broke about my Cubbies. Derrek Lee for Hee Seop and an unimportant minor league (to be named later). I argued for this trade on both Primer and the Cub Reporter. Primer was a very negative source for the trade, and the Cub Reporter was filled with optimism. I'll make my argument a little later in this column, but basically, it's very stupid and close-minded for any REAL Cub fan to diss Jim Hendry. Read on if you want stuff on that.

But today I'm going back to salaries briefly, in which I've spent each of the last two days talking about. I gave rough estimates of where teams currently stood at, and how much money that would leave them on the free agent market. Numbers ranged from $4M to over $30M, obviously depending on the team and market. I wanted to establish what type of market there would be, and how much money would be sitting around for free agents.

So, I've added all the totals of how much teams will spend this offseason, for both the National League and the American League...

National League- $218M ($13.625M per team)
American League- $173M ($12.357M per team)

Major League Baseball- $391M ($13.033M per team)

The National League is slightly more this offseason, which is mainly helped by me adding the Curt Schilling trade int my accounts. I then used the Transaction Guy's free agents listing to discover there are currently 204 Major League free agents whom have filed for free agency and intend to sign. I say that because Roger Clemens, Albert Belle, and Dean Palmer are all likely finished. So, a little more calculating:

$391M/204FA= $1.917M per FA

So, by my