Zduriencik Is the New Beane

[joepepsi]

The Mariners' payroll in 2009 was $98 million, nearly $20 million more than the Brewers'. To that they have added at least another $16 million by acquiring Figgins and Lee. Their payroll in 2010 may be 50% higher than the Brewers'.

They shed a lot of salary too. They lost Washburn, Beltre, Batista, Johjima. Just those 4 guys accounted for over $40 million dollars last season. Jeez, Bavasi was terrible.

You're right. I wasn't thinking of the players who were gone. I think Jack Z is going to be a fine GM. Most likely he will always have more resources in Seattle than does Milwaukee. As I recall the Mariners were the second most profitable team in MLB before Bavasi ran them into the ground and attendance slipped. Jack appears to have righted the ship, so expect the fans to come back and the money to flow back in.

[rluzinski]

JonnyLungs,

 

I don't think we are in major disagreement. My question about the level of sophistication of Lawson's analysis wasn't a rhetorical one. I have little to go by, so I can't begin to come to any strong conclusions. He coauthored a book in 1994, which intoduced his TOPR metric, among other things. It's almost identical to a couple of other metrics that had already been invented (base-out Percentage and Total Average). They all have the same basic structure, total bases divided by outs:

 

http://walksaber.blogspot.com/2008/02/beating-dead-horse-pt-4.html

 

There are much better ways to measure offensive performances these days. And while it's unfair to speculate about the quality of Lawson's present work based on what he did 15 years ago, the fact that he mentioned these stats in the above interview only a few years ago is concerning. Any metric that weights all bases equally is going to be inferior to one that recognizes that a walk is not equal to a single. Perhaps he's since updated TOPR to weight each batting event correctly but then it's basically not TOPR anymore, so why even call it that?

 

As for the Kendall batting 9th thing, here's a quote from Mark A:

 

"We didn't bring somebody in just to look at this," Attanasio said. "But it was one we did look at. It showed 30 to 40 more runs a year. I think this shows we were willing to think outside the box, bring a fresh perspective."

 

http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/31973384.html

 

Another account credited both Lawson and Tony Blengino (who now runs Seattle's statistical research department) with the estimate and put it at 25-30 runs. 2.5 - 3 wins? That's the difference between an average player and a star. Around $12 mil in free agent value. 27 runs is about 34 less outs. I can't imagine how someone could come up with that number. Were they assuming 35 less double plays? It doesn't begin to pass the smell test.

 

The whole situation was odd, as the Brewers, despite repeatedly advertizing the suposedly HUGE benefit of batting the pitcher 8th, abandoned it after a short time. How do go from having everyone from the owner to the janitor saying it's the most brilliant strategy ever to saying "Nevermind, it's not worth the bother"?

 

A more minor objection, in the Brewcrew interview, he said, "Miller Park is more of a neutral park that has only some small, relatively subtle effects on how one should put together a team or play the game." Traditional park factors agree that Miller park is neutral overall but shows a pretty significant HR park factor. Traditional park factors are pretty "low tech" though, so perhaps he has his own way of estimating them.

 

And... that's about it. The few other times that he's been quoted that I could find, he sounded intelligent and knowlegeable (although he never really talked about anything too specific). So yeh, I'm just speculating. I'd much prefer that Melvin's moves were so brilliant that I'd have no other choice but to believe that he was both receiving and utilizing top notch statistical analysis.

[logan82]

It is much easier to wheel and deal when you are a mid seventies win team compared to when you are a team a player or two away from competing for a playoff spot. Unless Seattle way outperforms their Pythagorean record again, they were a mid seventies win team at the start of the offseason.

[JoeHova]

It is much easier to wheel and deal when you are a mid seventies win team compared to when you are a team a player or two away from competing for a playoff spot. Unless Seattle way outperforms their Pythagorean record again, they were a mid seventies win team at the start of the offseason.

2009 Brewers pythag record: 78-84

2009 Mariners pythag record: 75-87

 

I'm not seeing a lot of difference there.

[NievesNoNO]

tigerbrew[/b]]To me, Jack Z has done a better job as GM than Doug Melvin this year despite his newbie status. He has proven to be more intelligent and have a better eye for talent than DM. Jack Z also seem to be more creative and hardworking than DM. It's mainly due to Jack Z that we have our key players Prince, Braun and Yo, while DM unwisely splurged on Suppan, assembled a poor rotation resulting in a disappointing 2009 season.

 

For a modest payroll team like the Brewers, I think maybe Jack Z is the better choice for GM than Doug Melvin.

Not sure how you gauge that someone is more intelligent and has a better eye for talent than another in one year. So let me understand this, Jack Z is responsible for all our good young talent and Melvin is responsible for Suppan and Looper. Seems like a fair evaluation.

 

I think Jack Z will make a fine GM, but to prop him on a pedistal and call him superior to a GM that has a proven track record seems a bit premature. All I know is the Brewers under Melvin went to the play-offs for the 1st time in more than 2 decades and he took a Texas franchise, who was never there before and not back since he left, to the play-offs 3 times.

 

I'll be the first to say everyone's job is always under review so he still has something to prove going forward and whether he's the right guy to push the team to the next level is debatable. However, I agree with whoever said the grass always looks greener on the other side. How quick we forget how pitiful the Brewers were just a few years back.

 

On to the original post. I liked the article on Jack Z. I think it's obvious he uses stats in his decision making process, especially the defensive metrics. At this point I would assume all GMs are using some form of stat/metric in their work. If they're not they probably shouldn't be a GM. By the same token statistics alone won't build a championship team. While stats are nice tool you still need to be able to spot talent, draft well, and use your intuition.

[BREWCREW5]

For people on this forum, it is much easier it be negative than postive.

 

"Jack Z is superior to Doug Melvin. Melvin is to blame for everything bad." "Wolf is Suppan 2.0" blah blah blah

 

I wish people would realize that Melvin had the final say in every move inlcuding Braun, Yo and Fielder, Looper, Suppan, etc.

[TheCrew07]

I wish people would realize that Melvin had the final say in every move inlcuding Braun, Yo and Fielder, Looper, Suppan, etc.

Actually it's been proven repeatedly that Melvin offers input but doesn't make draft day decisions. I hold Z and Melvin equally responsible for the pitching issues though, Melvin was in the position to ultimately rectify the situation (and still is), but Z didn't get enough high ceiling arms into the system. When you only have a couple of projectable arms, of course it will sink the franchise when the majority of those arms get hurt.

[The Truth]

Count me in as being not particularily impressed with either the Figgins signing or (especially) trading 3 very good prospects for Cliff Lee. The off-season is far from over though, so we'll see what else he can put together. If he is "going for it all" with aquiring Lee, he's got a ways to go

[TooLiveBrew]

They shed a lot of salary too. They lost Washburn, Beltre, Batista, Johjima. Just those 4 guys accounted for over $40 million dollars last season. Jeez, Bavasi was terrible.

 

Blame Bavasi for the other three, but Beltre was absolutely worth his money. I'm not sure that the M's will get equal production from Figgins, but it seems they opted for him because they felt Beltre would cost more.

[rluzinski]

Count me in as being not particularily impressed with either the Figgins signing or (especially) trading 3 very good prospects for Cliff Lee. The off-season is far from over though, so we'll see what else he can put together. If he is "going for it all" with aquiring Lee, he's got a ways to go

He got 1 yer of Lee for about $8 mil less than he is worth. That is a huge chunk of the value of this trade.

[JoeHova]

Blame Bavasi for the other three, but Beltre was absolutely worth his money. I'm not sure that the M's will get equal production from Figgins, but it seems they opted for him because they felt Beltre would cost more.

I agree that Beltre was fine, I brought him up in the context of all the money they were losing from their payroll. If you want to make the claim that Bavasi was a good GM, go for it.

[TooLiveBrew]

Well, I obviously didn't do that. It just seems odd to blame him for what was a good signing.

[sgtcluels]

Count me in as being not particularily impressed with either the Figgins signing or (especially) trading 3 very good prospects for Cliff Lee. The off-season is far from over though, so we'll see what else he can put together. If he is "going for it all" with aquiring Lee, he's got a ways to go

He got 1 yer of Lee for about $8 mil less than he is worth. That is a huge chunk of the value of this trade.

 

Exactly. And since the prospects weren't even the crown jewel of their system. Think they said that expected value about $8M total for the prospects and then will get 2 picks from being class A. He just delayed that batch of prospects by a bit. I think it was a pretty good win.

[tigerbrew]

I think Jack Z will make a fine GM, but to prop him on a pedistal and call him superior to a GM that has a proven track record seems a bit premature. All I know is the Brewers under Melvin went to the play-offs for the 1st time in more than 2 decades and he took a Texas franchise, who was never there before and not back since he left, to the play-offs 3 times.

Jack Z is a newbie GM so I agree it is a bit premature to say he is superior to DM, but as mentioned I think he did a better job this year than DM.

 

I think Jack Z deserves lots of credit for helping the Brewers make the playoffs in 2008. The offensive core in 2008 were the cheap young homegrown players drafted by him, and DM wouldn't have been able to pull off the CC trade without the quality prospects JZ had drafted. I think it can be said that without JZ, the Brewers may not have been able to make postseason in 2008.

Listening to this recent MLB winter meetings interview, I think explains DM's mindset towards starting pitching which doesn't sound intelligent. Paraphrasing DM, he said that in the past he had looked for guys to give him innings, but now he knows it's not good enough and he now looks for guys to give him quality innings hence Wolf signing. I think his past mindset could explain why he had targeted "innings eater" Suppan and Looper previously, and why he wasn't aggressive in upgrading our SP last offseason. DM basically thought that the offense could carry most of the load which was wrong. Glad that DM has a change in mindset towards starting pitching and I hope he's not done yet in improving our SP.

 

Last pre-season most pundits predicted that the Brewers wouldn't get to postseason due to starting pitching, but DM thought otherwise and we now know who is right. Think I'd be interested to read the pundits' prediction for the Brewers this pre-season.

 

Edit: incorrect link.

[danzig6767]

Melvin has claimed that he utilizes statistical based analysis, but I question the quality of the analysis and to what extent Melvin uses it. I don't recall the name of the stat guy Melvin uses (some fansite interviewed him a few years ago) but he's been paired with him since Melvin's time with the Rangers. Is this guy at the forfront of sabermetric research? Does he have people working under him?

 

While limited, some of statistical conclusions Melvin has made public have been out there. For instance, it was claimed that batting Kendal 9th would result in something like 20+ extra runs scored over the course of the season. I'm sorry but that is completely unbelievable based on the research I've seen. There have been a few other headscratchers as well.

 

Some of Melvin's moves have also made me question whether good statistical analysis is being used. Some of Melvins quotes during the Suppan signing made me want to gag (Innings eater, proven winner, knows how to pitch in big games, blah blah). The average baseball fan eats that kind of stuff up but come does Melvin believe that stuff? I've always been under the assumption that Mark A. forced Melvin's hand on that deal. I sure hope so.

 

In contrast, Zduriencik formed an entire Department of Statistical Research when he became GM. Many of his moves suggest he's using them.

FWIW, i heard Melvin interviewed on Homer today and at least when it comes to defensive stats, Doug didn't sound like he believed in them much. I personally don't have much interest in learning about all the various baseball stats out there, i just watch the games so i don't know about how much credibility should be put in defensive stats. Melvin though did say in the interview that he doesn't have much confidence in all the defensive stats out there and instead preferred the eyeball method for evaluating defense.

 

Listening to him over the years, my gut feeling towards Doug when it comes to statistical based analysis is that he certainly uses it and feels it has value, but that he has more "old school" type of beliefs in evaluating players and team building than some of the newer GM's who are extremely stat based in how they go about team building.

[NievesNoNO]

Jack Z is a newbie GM so I agree it is a bit premature to say he is superior to DM, but as mentioned I think he did a better job this year than DM.

 

I think Jack Z deserves lots of credit for helping the Brewers make the playoffs in 2008. The offensive core in 2008 were the cheap young homegrown players drafted by him, and DM wouldn't have been able to pull off the CC trade without the quality prospects JZ had drafted. I think it can be said that without JZ, the Brewers may not have been able to make postseason in 2008.

Sorry, I scanned over the "this year" part in your origninal post. On a one year basis I could see how you could make that arguement. I don't necessarily agree, but I do think Jack did an admirable job in his first year.

 

I also agree that Jack Z. was an integral part of what the Brewers have been able to accomplish. I just think Melvin takes some undue flack sometimes and doesn't always get the credit he deserves.

 

I will also agree that Doug hasn't exactly put together a steller pitching staff. From his standpoint he hasn't had much homegrown pitching talent to work with. So his only option has really been to try and play in free agency or trade. He's always been an offense first GM so I'm skeptical he'll put together a front-line staff, but he really only needs to get the staff to average with where the offense is at right now.

[JonnyLungs]

Jack Z deserves plenty of praise for his integration of statistical analysis but let's not forget that his background is as a scouting director. I'm pretty sure he goes about things in the right way utilizing as much information as he possibly can, whether it be the eyes of scouts or the numbers of his statistical department.

 

As for defensive metrics and Doug Melvin's opinion on them, I didn't hear exactly what he said about them but relying completely on defensive metrics wouldn't seem to be the best course of action. Sample sizes, disagreements between metrics and such don't make it even close to a perfect science. They should most certainly be considered but I'd still put a lot of stock in a scout's eyes when it comes to defense. More so than hitting or pitching.

[rluzinski]

As for defensive metrics and Doug Melvin's opinion on them, I didn't hear exactly what he said about them but relying completely on defensive metrics wouldn't seem to be the best course of action. Sample sizes, disagreements between metrics and such don't make it even close to a perfect science. They should most certainly be considered but I'd still put a lot of stock in a scout's eyes when it comes to defense. More so than hitting or pitching.

If Melvin wants to use 75% scouts + 25% stats for defense, I wouldn't argue. 0% stats would be disappointing. Melvin doesn't exactly have the greatest track record for valuing defense very well. Hart and Braun at 3B were complete disasters. If melvin's scouts were telling him that either could be even passable 3B... Hall in CF was pretty bad as well.. Weeks at 2B is debatable. Gamel at 3B is yet to be seen but I don't have high hopes. Seems like the Brewers are always trying to force a square peg in a round hole, defensively speaking. With Escobar and Gomez, it looks like Melvin is starting to put more value in defense but still.

[JoeHova]

Hall in CF was pretty bad as well..

The stats (at least UZR) disagree with this one. UZR has Bill being a well above average CF (+6.3/150), though of course sample size is an issue (138 games).

[Thurston Fluff]

As mos there I want JZ to do well. he's one of ours. I don't think he's better than Melvin but he may turn out to be as good or better. Time will tell but he has a good start. He needs to win something before we dub him the next coming though. Stats are great and need to be used. I am not sure we have access to some of the best stats. Guys like Melvin may have developed methods unlike the public ones but he thinks are improvements on them. It may be he, or any other GM for that matter, is using statistical information that is unnoticed as stats info.

 

 

Some of Melvin's moves have also made me question whether good statistical analysis is being used. Some of Melvins quotes during the Suppan signing made me want to gag (Innings eater, proven winner, knows how to pitch in big games, blah blah). The average baseball fan eats that kind of stuff up but come does Melvin believe that stuff?

 

some of that I think is just fodder for the public. I do think he values durability and innings eaters. I don't know what statistics show about it's value but I tend to think there is some merit to durability. The Suppan deal was right in the durability department but wrong on how good those actual innings would be through the length of the contract. Even then I think some of that signing was with the knowledge it would be bad in the end. If you remember he was signed after the Brewers lost a season when three starters went down. The one thing they needed badly at the time was a guy who would take the ball every 5th day. At the time he was that and was an average pitcher. Soup has been durable through most of the contract so a major reason for signing him did happen as planned. Problem is now he is below average and still expensive. I think Doug knew that would most likely be the case but thought the short term gains were worth the long term risk.

 

With Escobar and Gomez, it looks like Melvin is starting to put more value in defense but still.

 

I remember when Stairs was on the team he said he thought Stairs was having a pretty good year but didn't realize how much Yost valued defense. It seems he's been coming around to at least understanding the mangers desire for defense. I also think he's starting to see there is more value in defense than he previously thought.

part of the may be because stat guys need good stats to make proper value judgments. If they don't have them they may undervalue those types of players.

[MarquesJohnson2000]

" If you remember he was signed after the Brewers lost a season when three starters went down. The one thing they needed badly at the time was a guy who would take the ball every 5th day. "

 

This is exactly the case.. Melvin was so scarred by the Eveland/Hendrickson experience that he made it his top priority to make sure he had "healthy" pitchers.

[joepepsi]

There's tremendous value in healthy league average pitching. A starter like that might be worth oh, say, $10 million a year. At least that was about right in the market where Suppan was signed. I'll agree the Brewers may have overpaid a couple million a year or by adding the 4th year, but this was an organization that no worthwhile free agents took seriously. If Soup's contract got other players to take the Brewers more seriously in the ensuing offseasons, then the extra $$ or year were well worth it.

 

Melvin doesn't exactly have the greatest track record for valuing defense very well.

Melvin was not alone among GM's in the early-mid part of this decade. In part because of the inflated offense of the steroid issue, most GMs as recently as 3 years ago put a greater emphasis on offense. (After all, the team that scores the most runs win the game!)

 

It's only been the last couple offseasons that we've a shift in valuing defense. In 07/08 Dunn made $23.5 million. As a free agent last winter he had to settle for a 2 year deal for $20 million from the worst team in baseball. Similar circumstances for Burrell. He had to settle for a 2 year/$16 million deal after making $50 million in his previous contract.

 

Everybody was undervaluing defense until very recently. Criticizing Melvin for doing the same is similar to all the criticisms of him on this board. It looks at his actions in a revisionist vacuum, not in the context of the original event.

[dadofandrew]

I thought Hall was fine in CF, especially after the first month or so. You'll also find lots of people go by stuff like "getting turned around", but that is meaningless if they catch the ball.

[TooLiveBrew]

It's meaningless except that it demonstrates that the fielder didn't read the ball correctly. If that kind of thing happens sparingly, no big deal. But if you're have to turn around too much it will lead to horrible jumps on the ball way too frequently. I agree that Hall was passable in CF.

[TheCrew07]

Everybody was undervaluing defense until very recently. Criticizing Melvin for doing the same is similar to all the criticisms of him on this board. It looks at his actions in a revisionist vacuum, not in the context of the original event.

 

 

 

I don't think it's fair to qualify criticizing Melvin as "revisionist history". Clearly, he's reactionary and just follows the market instead of trying to exploit the market. I hate to keep going back to TB but again they are the perfect example, while the majority of GMs were chasing power hitters around they were quietly building a dominant pitching staff through trades. Now that Melvin finally seems to realize the team doesn't have enough pitching it's too late, the market has swung back towards pitching and defense, it's clear he missed his opportunities to exploit the market. I'm not one to constantly harp on Money Ball, but the one thing I took the from the book was the best thing a small market GM can do is try to exploit weaknesses in the market. The weakness in the organization has been clear to anyone who's followed the minor leagues since I came onboard this site in 2002, it's not like this situation just happened over night, it's been a long time coming. Now it seems like we've reached a point where Melvin is going to have to overpay to acquire pitching, it really does seem like he missed the boat. Again, Melvin doesn't strike me as someone who's going to work and think outside the box, he seems to be a reactionary GM who tends to favor offense.

 

Personally I've been thinking about this for years, started posting about it 2 summers ago, and I've continued to beat the drum ever since. Anyone that reads the minor league forum knows that I tend to focus on the young pitching and spend most of my time talking about them in the Link Reports. It's not revisionist history, it's about philosophy, and I'm simply miles away from the tact that DM seems to prefer. He's good GM, but he's not a great GM, and I'm not sold that in doing things his way Milwaukee will ever get over the top as he's already extended the payroll out as far as he go and we still have a very average rotation. Until we quit spending money on the bullpen and back of the rotation starters I think we'll always be just good enough to compete for a playoff spot, but never good enough to truly compete for a championship. My only hope is that this next wave talent pans out wonderfully so that Melvin doesn't have to address pitching anymore, either in the rotation or the bullpen, so that he can focus on the offense which is an area he excels at. I'd rather he spend money on FA hitters anyway if he's going to plug holes through FA...