Proof of the weakness of the bottom of our roster

[adambr2]

http://espn.go.com/blog/SweetSpot/post/_/id/14144/deadline-drama-reviewing-2008-10

 

Who gives the most AB's to the worst players? It's us. And it isn't even close:

2. When you have so much parity like this, it only takes one or two players having bad seasons to derail a potential playoff bid. Which teams have given the most playing time to bad players? Looking at the primary playoff contenders, here is how many plate appearances each team has given to hitters with an OPS+ (on-base + slugging percentage, adjusted for home park, scaled to where 100 is a league average hitter) of 75 or less, entering Sunday's action. (From Baseball-Reference.com.)

 

National League

1. Brewers, 1250

2. Braves, 823

3. Giants, 809

4. Pirates, 660

5. Phillies, 534

6. Reds, 461

7. Diamondbacks, 456

8. Cardinals, 231

 

The Brewers are the team that should be kicking itself the most if it misses the playoffs, high in star power but a brutal bottom of the roster. Yuniesky Betancourt's line was predictable, but Casey McGehee has been even worse. Both have held their jobs. What is inexcusable is giving more than 300 plate appearances to vets Craig Counsell and Mark Kotsay.

[adambr2]

To sum it up, IMO, we need to upgrade both of the black holes that we have in the IF. If we decide to just let it ride and just miss out on the playoffs, it's going to be something we all regret for a long time, and it will almost surely be the last call for Doug.

[FVBrewerFan]

Agree with the 1st part, not the 2nd. Just as DM seems willing to ride McGehee/Yuni/Counsell/Kotsay into 3rd place, Mark A will stand by DM to the bitter end.

[bucksman4]

Someone send this to Melvin STAT! You don't get the opportunity for a post season run every year in Milwaukee...make it count Doug.

[TwinsBrewersWorldSeries]

I think this is an outstanding post and is exactly why i'm so frustrated with Melvin. Doug's calling card has been that he could find "league average players" for cheap, but never could get the blue chips that would lead to a deep playoff run. This year we have 4-5 blue chips (Braun, Prince, Ax, Wolf, Greinke, Morgan), but the bottom half of our offense has been so pathetic that we haven't been able to capitalize.

 

Replace Casey/Yuni with league average players and we're a 95 win team (over a full season)

[Invader3K]

You would think Attanasio would demand action at some point.

[gregmag]

This really says it all. I have always had a generally high opinion of Melvin, but his darker / weaker impulses seem to have overwhelmed him this year. Just this morning in the JS, he's saying that they just need to get McGehee going and he really likes what Kotsay can do. I understand that he often blows smoke for strategic reasons, but those comments just don't have any relationship to reality.

 

I'm old enough to remember when something like this happened with Harry Dalton. Dalton was a great GM for quite a while; he basically saved the franchise from perpetual suckitude. But late in his tenure he started to get complacent and overvalue his players. I'm coming around now to the view I eventually came around to then -- it's time for a change.

[greeg35]

Here is Haudricourt's response to this article via email:

"I don't think this is a big shock that McGehee and Betancourt have had down years. Counsell obviously has been bad. Kotsay however has helped win some games."

Not only is he under the inexplicable spell of Mark Kotsay, he also completely misses the point of the article. That's our beat writer. Keep lobbing in those softballs, Tom.

[Invader3K]

Kotsay really isn't a big problem on this team. Betancourt, McGehee, and Counsell are all guys that should not be on a contending team. Kotsay is OK to have around as a 25th man on the roster for now.

[JohnBriggs12]

Sorry but this is just an example of how stats can be manipulated to make a point. If the cutoff were under 75 instead of 75 or less, the Brewer total would be 737. Betancourt and Kotsay are right on the cutoff line. Included in the total are AB's given to Almonte, Nieves, Reed and Gamel, none of whom figures to get key ABs from here on out.

 

If the AL were included, the White Sox have 1,128 AB's for guys 72 and under, and 1,004 for guys 64 and under. So it's not like they are singularly standing out amongst all teams.

 

The strength of this team was never supposed to be it's bottom of its roster. They are high on this particular measurement because of one guy, Casey McGehee, and he was the team MVP last year and isn't supposed to be the bottom of the roster. The strength of this team was supposed to be it's rotation and the middle of its order. The rotation has been middle of the road. The glaring issue with the middle of the order again is McGehee. No team wins championships because they have a superior bottom of a roster. You win because you have the best pitching or best combination of star power in your lineup combined with solid pitching.

 

Since June 1, Betancourt's line is .290/.300/.426, 4 HR, 18 RBI. Now if there's a guy out there that is available that is likely to be an improvement on that or is equal to that but provides measurably better defense, and can be had for a reasonable cost, by all means then you get that guy. Otherwise Betancourt is here so get used to it.

[rluzinski]

Sorry but this is just an example of how stats can be manipulated to make a point.

Are you accusing ESPN of anti-Brewerism? I agree that the 75 cutoff is arbitrary but I don't think it was chosen to make the Brewers look bad.

"I don't think this is a big shock that McGehee and Betancourt have had down years. Counsell obviously has been bad. Kotsay however has helped win some games."

Kotsay has a .56 WAR from batting. Unfortunately, a couple of large defensive miscues probably pushes that into negative territory.

[JohnBriggs12]

Sorry but this is just an example of how stats can be manipulated to make a point.

Are you accusing ESPN of anti-Brewerism? I agree that the 75 cutoff is arbitrary but I don't think it was chosen to make the Brewers look bad.

"I don't think this is a big shock that McGehee and Betancourt have had down years. Counsell obviously has been bad. Kotsay however has helped win some games."

Kotsay has a .56 WAR from batting. Unfortunately, a couple of large defensive miscues probably pushes that into negative territory.

I'm accusing them of bringing up a totally arbitrary set of stats that don't prove anything going forward and that can lead to entirely misleading and wrong conclusions.

[greeg35]

The conclusion is that we have given an extraordinary number of plate appearances to bad hitters compared to our competition.

[Invader3K]

The conclusion is that we have given an extraordinary number of plate appearances to bad hitters compared to our competition.

Yeah, I think it's a pretty black and white issue at this point. The season is almost 2/3rds done, and it's evident that we've been overplaying some really bad hitters compared to the competition.

[Dragonbait]

'on-base + slugging percentage, adjusted for home park, scaled to where 100 is a league average hitter'

 

Thats the thing that always bothers me...

 

That 'number' fluxuates way too much...

 

good hitting team + bad pitching staff = hitter's park ( i know its not that cut and dry, but you get the point.)

 

edit >

 

I dont like the idea of adjusting numbers... you tend to lose credibility with me.. but thats just a personal thing.

(really dont like how i said this because it doesn't articulate what i really want to say.. but I'm having trouble putting it into words)

[rluzinski]

good hitting team + bad pitching staff = hitter's park

Perhaps you wouldn't be as skeptical about adjustments if you took the time to learn more about them. The first google hit for "park factor" brings up ESPN's park factor page, which explains how it is calculated. How you describe it is 100% incorrect.

To be fair, ESPN's park factors DO fluctuate a lot from year-to-year because they are only using one year's worth of data. A better way is to use multiple years of data and to regress. I know Baseballreference.com (which is where OPS+ comes from uses multiple years.

Of course, I'm not a big fan of OPS either, but it's WAYYYY better than BA!

 

[FVBrewerFan]

The good news here (or bad news I guess) is that you can use any stat you want, and you'll reach the same conclusion. The variance will change depending on what stats you use, but the conclusion will be the same. Conclusion being, the Brewers have far too many ABs from players who aren't very good.

[Ennder]

Park Factors are largely useless so I always have a problem with it too. Each park effects different types of hitters in a different way. Miller Park might be a hitters park for a slugger like Fielder but it isn't for a slap hitter at all. Petco is a pitchers park for a guy like Fielder but it was a hitters park for someone like Loretta who likes hitting in the gaps in a large OF. Not to mention they all work differently vs RH and LH hitters.

[RightFieldCoder]

Russ, which stat do you prefer? I know OPS isn't the be all end all, but it's the best I got when I'm at the game. Once a homestand I have to hear people complain about it being on the board because it's such a "worthless" stat. They usually use the old Avg/HR/RBI to evaluate hitters and have no idea what a WHIP is.

[Baldkin]

wOBA is much, much better than OPS as it properly values OBP.

[monty57]

No team wins championships because they have a superior bottom of a roster. You win because you have the best pitching or best combination of star power in your lineup combined with solid pitching.

 

I'd say teams win because they have the best team, with a little bit of "luck" sprinkled in. There are a million ways to create a roster, but no matter the makeup, when a significant amount of PAs (or IP) are given to bad players, it makes the team worse. Right now we have a bi-polar team, with a really good top of the lineup and a really bad bottom of the lineup and a really bad bench.

 

The frustration with the 2011 Brewers is that it would be really easy to make a few quick fixes and make the team a lot better, but they're either not being done (Green for McGehee, dumping one of our bad SS's and replacing them with a real baseball player) or they're taking far too long (taking Loe out of the "8th inning guy" role). We should be in first place by a longshot, but instead, we're in third place behind the Cards & Pirates. If some sensibility doesn't spring up soon, we're likely to throw away a really good shot at the playoffs.

 

Betancourt .643 OPS, bad defense

McGehee .586 OPS, bad defense

Kotsay .637 OPS, bad defense

Counsell .454 OPS, .160 BA

 

The only name on that list who couldn't instantly be replaced in-house is Betancourt, and since he has been highly regarded as one of the worst players in baseball for the last three years, Melvin has had a long time to research potential upgrades at SS. Not only are we giving starting positions to historically bad players, our bench is so bad that Roenicke is seriously limited. He can't give days off to guys like Weeks & Fielder or we don't have a chance of scoring runs, an injury to Braun means Mark Kotsay is the #3 hitter, and most of our pitchers are better hitters than our bench players.

[rluzinski]

Russ, which stat do you prefer? I know OPS isn't the be all end all, but it's the best I got when I'm at the game. Once a homestand I have to hear people complain about it being on the board because it's such a "worthless" stat. They usually use the old Avg/HR/RBI to evaluate hitters and have no idea what a WHIP is.

Compared to any of the traditional stats, OPS is the greatest thing since sliced bread. It just underestimates the value of OBP.

wOBA properly weighs the value of batting events (out, HBP, walk, single, double, triple and HR). Obviously, that is not going to be available at the park but it's roughly proportional to 1.8 x OBP + SLG. If I'm comparing two players, I look at the difference in their SLG and add that to twice the difference of their OBP. So again, roughly speaking, these two players are fairly equal in terms of their impact on team runs:

OBP / SLG / OPS

.375 / .400 / .775

.325 / .500 / .825

 

[Oldcity]

The strength of this team was supposed to be it's rotation and the middle of its order. The rotation has been middle of the road. The glaring issue with the middle of the order again is McGehee.

The rotation has been great. The defense has been terrible, which makes the rotation look middle of the road.

[adambr2]

Stevo]

JohnBriggs12 wrote:

The strength of this team was supposed to be it's rotation and the middle of its order. The rotation has been middle of the road. The glaring issue with the middle of the order again is McGehee.

The rotation has been great. The defense has been terrible, which makes the rotation look middle of the road.

Agreed. Just look at the FIP and xFIP of our starting rotation:

 

FIP/xFIP

Greinke - 3.03, 2.17

Marcum - 3.66, 3.56

Gallardo - 3.74, 3.49

Wolf - 4.34, 4.30

Narveson - 3.42, 3.56

 

Not that these stats are the end-all, but our starting pitching independent of our fielding would put us near the top of the league.

[JohnBriggs12]

Just thought it was worthwhile re-visiting the initial premise of this thread that the bottom of the Brewers roster was holding them back as "evidenced" by the number of AB's going to players with OPS+ of 75 or under which at the time led the league. The solution offered was that those guys needed to be replaced.

 

Well Betancourt's OPS+ is now up to 77, so you can deduct his AB's from the total. McGehee's is up to 74 and rising quickly and figures to reach above 75 soon. That's about 800 AB's right there.

 

The solution it turns out was for these guys to start hitting like the numbers on the back of their bubble gum cards suggested they are capable of. They have.