AaronGleeman.com

Friday, October 22, 2004

Going Downtown

As most of you are probably well aware of, I've been writing previews for each postseason series over at The Hardball Times. When the Red Sox finished off the Yankees on Wednesday night, I thought about pre-writing two versions of my World Series preview -- one with Boston playing St. Louis and one with Boston playing Houston, so I could have the preview ready immediately regardless of who won Game 7 of the NLCS.

Normally I wouldn't even consider something like that, but the first game of the World Series is on Saturday and a lot fewer people come to websites to read about baseball on the weekend. Because of that, today would have been the day to bust out the preview for the largest possible audience. But being the lazy bum that I am, I decided that writing two previews, including one for a series that isn't even happening, was far too much work.

Instead, I watched last night's thrilling NLCS Game 7 with a plan to work on my World Series preview today and have it posted sometime before Game 1. So, if you're interested in reading that, make sure to stop by either here or THT at some point late tonight/early tomorrow.

In addition to finding some time to work on that, I also have a pretty busy day scheduled. First, I'm heading downtown to City Hall to sit in on this morning's Minneapolis City Council meeting in the hopes of finding something interesting to write about for an assignment in one of my journalism classes. Actually, more than finding something interesting, I need to find something that I can understand, which will probably be more of a challenge. After I finish up there, I'm headed to lunch with the "Stick and Ball Guy" from, where else, the Stick and Ball Guy blog.

The entire day is based around a) waking up early, b) negotiating my way downtown, c) finding my way to City Hall, d) understanding politics, e) getting myself to our lunch destination, and then f) negotiating my way back home.

Aside from the understanding politics part, and maybe the waking up early, that probably doesn't sound like much of a challenge for a reasonably bright, relatively able-bodied person. And for a normal human being it's not a big deal at all, but I have a slightly worse sense of direction than a doorknob. You wouldn't believe how many times I've told someone that I went somewhere and they've asked, "Oh, where was that?" only to have me stare blankly back at them and say, "I'm really not sure."

There are places that I've been to dozens of times -- restaurants, stores, people's homes -- that I couldn't find without incredibly detailed directions if you offered me a $50,000 prize and gave me five hours. The fact that I can be in a car that travels from Point A to Point B and have literally no clue about where the points were or what the route between them was is something that amazes everyone who knows me.

So that's that. City Council meeting in the morning, lunch in the afternoon, World Series preview at night. Oh, and in case you're wondering, this counts as an exciting day in the life of Aaron Gleeman. Plus, I'd say there's a 50/50 chance I'll never make it back from downtown, getting on some bus that I think is headed back to campus only to find myself in Nebraska before I realize I'm going the wrong way.

Today at The Hardball Times:
- Mythbusters (by Larry Mahnken)
- Rivals in Exile: The Comeback (by Ben Jacobs and Larry Mahnken)
- Hoosier Daddy (by Brian Gunn)



*****Comments? Questions? Email me!*****


Thursday, October 21, 2004

Anyone do anything interesting last night?

No? Me neither. I just watched a little baseball ...

The Hardball Times: Game Diary: ALCS Game 7


*****Comments? Questions? Email me!*****


Wednesday, October 20, 2004

In-Class Notes

While writing this blog, I have found that the most difficult time to think of a topic to discuss is when I'm sitting at the computer, staring at a blank page. Somehow the pressure to come up with something in that situation -- even when there's really very little pressure at all -- causes my mind to go blank. Yet, if I'm somewhere else, say in the shower or on the bus, or doing something else, say watching a movie or instant messaging with someone, the ideas flow with ease.

As evidence of that, I was sitting in one of my classes earlier this week, daydreaming about the wonderful world of journalism, when a whole bunch of random topics popped into my head ...

  • If you'd have told me two years ago that Joe Mauer would hit .309/.369/.570 with six homers in 35 games this season, I would have been thrilled. If you'd have told me the exact same thing six months ago, I would have been disappointed. It's funny how that works. Of course, now no one even talks about what Mauer did on the field, because everyone is worried about that damn knee of his.


  • Some of you may have noticed a complete lack of updates on my fantasy football team lately and the reason for that is simple: I started the Baseball Think Factory League season 0-3. So why am I talking about it again now? Again, simple: I have since won three games in a row and I'm within two games of first place. There is nothing better than narrowly winning your game after you pick up Jermaine Wiggins off the waiver wire and he scores two touchdowns on Sunday night.


  • I had to be all vague and say that "I was sitting in one of my classes" while I thought of this stuff because, frankly, too many people know about this blog now. That's usually a good thing, obviously, but gone are the days when I could write about an awkward conversation I had in class, a boring lecture by a teacher, or another student peeing on himself in front of everyone.

    It's a sad thing, really. I used to have to sort of censor myself because my mom and some other members of my family might be reading, but now it's gone way beyond that, as people in all of my classes have discovered my little website (that picture in the Star Tribune didn't help matters). Of course, all of my classes this semester are great, the teachers are wonderful, the students are all completely normal, and nothing strange has happened.


  • As I get older, this blog gets more and more visitors, and my family's nagging about me getting a job grows stronger, I have been thinking about ways to make money from the writing I'm already doing here. I know the idea of me getting money from this blog is appalling to some of you, so I figured I should get everything out in the open so you can all be appalled together.

    As you may have noticed, I have two small ads for ticket brokers on the left-hand side of this page, for which I am being paid a small but substantial amount of money. Some of you also may remember that I had Google Ads on that same sidebar for a while, but I decided to take them down a couple months ago because the amount of money they generated wasn't worth taking up all that space (and appalling all of those readers).

    I'm not against the idea of having more ads on this blog, as long as they remain unintrusive like the ones I have now are. I'm also not against additional ways of generating income from this blog, as I know there are plenty of bloggers out there who have steady streams of income coming in solely from their blogs. Of course, I don't know enough about this sort of stuff to think of anything brilliant on my own, so if any of you have a product you'd like to advertise here or have some ideas for revenue-generating opportunities that are available to me, I'd love to hear from you. And if you just feel like yelling at me because I'm a greedy bastard, you're welcome to e-mail too.


  • On a somewhat related note, this blog went over the 800,000-visitor mark earlier this week, and at the rate we're going right now -- about 2,500-3,000 visitors per weekday -- one million total visitors is within reach by the time pitchers and catchers report for spring training. According to Blogger, I have written 632 entries totaling 914,924 words in the history of this blog. I have also included 13,774 "outward links" to various things, including at least 11,000 to pictures of Jessica Alba (make that 11,001). If only I got paid by the word ...


  • A few weeks ago I mentioned that I didn't really keep track of the specifics of my poker playing and a whole bunch of you e-mailed me to suggest a product called Poker Tracker that keep tabs on almost literally everything while you play online. I bit the bullet and bought it, and I am definitely not disappointed. (And no, that's not one of those ads I was talking about, I really did buy it.)

    I can't recommend it enough, although it actually has so many numbers and keeps track of so many things that it's difficult for me to get a handle on what the numbers mean, which numbers are actually meaningful, and what changes I should make to my game based on the numbers. I think I need a veteran Poker Tracker user to take a look at my numbers and give me their assessment.


  • I haven't played a "ring game" in at least a month, instead sticking to what I do best: 10-person, no-limit sit-and-go tournaments. One thing I've noticed lately is that I really tighten up when I have a low-to-medium stack of chips and there are only four players remaining, with the top three finishers winning money.

    One of my favorite moments from this year's World Series of Poker was when the event got close to the money cutoff, when people who get knocked out get paid rather than go home empty-handed, and Gus Hansen said something like: "Did you hear that boys? We're getting really close to the money!" A couple of the other professionals at the table laughed at Hansen and someone said, "Now Gus, why would you want to make sure to tell everyone that?"

    The reason is that clearly he was trying to impact the play of the table. The idea being that Hansen, who has won plenty of tournaments and millions as a professional poker player, doesn't really care if he finishes one spot out of the money or if he stays in another three hands and gets his $10,000 entry fee back. He's in it to win the whole damn thing, and if some of the amateurs or inexperienced players start worrying about sticking around long enough to win some money, they will likely tighten up their play, at which point Hansen can take advantage and steal a few pots.

    Of course, finishing one spot out of the money in a $20 sit-and-go tournament makes a pretty big difference to me. Because of that, I don't necessarily mind that I tighten up when I'm low-to-medium stacked with four players left, but I should then make an effort to take advantage of other players doing the same thing when I'm holding the big stack at the table and in no danger of being eliminated out of the money.
Today at The Hardball Times:
- What Goes Around (by Larry Mahnken)
- Interference (by Craig Burley)



*****Comments? Questions? Email me!*****


Tuesday, October 19, 2004

Other Early Moves

Yesterday, I commented on the Twins cutting Cristian Guzman loose, but they also made a few other moves over the weekend that I should talk about now, before I forget. The Twins picked up Henry Blanco's $750,000 option for next season, let Jose Offerman and Pat Borders become free agents, and lost Aaron Fultz to the Phillies via the waiver wire.

Aside from not blocking Kyle Lohse's 58-footer against the Yankees in the playoffs, Borders did a nice job for the Twins after coming over from Seattle late in the year. He hit .286/.302/.381 in 44 plate appearances, did well behind the plate, and gave Ron Gardenhire a second veteran catcher he had confidence in, which enabled Gardenhire to both give Blanco a few days off and pinch-hit for him when he started. At the same time, I don't think anyone was counting on Borders coming back for 2005. I'd love to see the Twins sign him to be a catcher/coach at Triple-A.

Similarly, Fultz is no great loss. He started the year well, but faded badly down the stretch as Gardenhire and pitching coach Rick Anderson lost complete confidence in him along the way. Fultz's overall numbers were pretty bad -- 5.04 ERA in 50 innings -- but he did a very nice job against lefties, holding them to .212/.290/.271, which is basically what the Twins brought him in to do anyway. In fact, Fultz is a good example of how someone's stock can go down when they perform poorly in a role they were never suited for in the first place.

Fultz is a lefty specialist and he did well in that role for much of the year, but he was often asked to come in and pitch a full inning or even multiple innings, which is when his deficiencies against righties came to the forefront. Righties hit .314/.388/.500 off of him, which led to the 5.04 ERA, but the fact is that he did well in the role he was supposed to do well in. There are far, far worse guys to have in the back of your bullpen, especially if you're not counting on him to be a long reliever.

As for Offerman, he's an example of how someone can out-perform your expectations for them by about a thousand percent and still not have a great season. Offerman's spot on the roster when the season began was one of the more confusing things to me, as it seemed as though the last thing the Twins, with their abundance of first basemen, designated hitters and corner outfielders, needed was a 35-year-old pinch-hitter who couldn't really hit.

To his credit (and to Terry Ryan's and Gardenhire's too), Offerman did extremely well in the role he was asked to fill, hitting .289/.390/.463 against right-handed pitching and .414/.528/.586 as a pinch-hitter. The thing I was worried about all along was that he'd become more than just the "veteran bench bat" that the Twins said they brought him in to be, and that did happen at times, as he hit just .211/.317/.350 as the team's starting DH. In all, Offerman got about 60 more at-bats than I would liked to have seen this year, but that wasn't the end of the world.

More importantly, he got some big hits, was used in some pretty good spots by Gardenhire, and impressed the hell out of me with his extraordinary plate discipline. I don't think I've ever seen a hitter go to the plate and show more discipline on borderline pitches than Offerman this year. Most of the reason for that is the fact that he can't really do much besides lob singles to short center field at this point in his career, but Offerman worked 29 walks in 202 plate appearances and did a nice job avoiding outs all year.

Offerman led the team in walks per plate appearance (.144) and was second to Joe Mauer in pitches seen per plate appearance (4.1). Amazingly, he has the sort of approach at the plate that I'd love to see Guzman have. Of course, Guzman saw the fewest pitches per plate appearance (3.4) on the entire team, so I won't be holding my breath. If the Twins weren't already so stacked at DH/LF/RF/1B, I actually wouldn't mind seeing Offerman back in the same role next year, which are words I would have thought impossible coming out of my mouth earlier this year.

Finally, Blanco will be back to hopefully fill the role the Twins wanted him to fill this season: backup to Mauer. Yesterday, I explained how dumbfounded I've been by the amount of praise Guzman received this year, and I have to admit that I'm similarly confused by the amount of praise Blanco has gotten. I've heard people -- dumb people, but people nonetheless -- say that Blanco was the MVP of the team in 2004, and you'd have a hard time finding a Twins fan who doesn't have glowing things to say about the job he did this season.

The strange thing is that, just like Guzman, Blanco did nothing this season that he hasn't done in past years. In fact, he came into this season as a .219/.295/.353 career hitter in over 1,400 plate appearances and hit .206/.260/.368, which is actually slightly below those incredibly low standards. When that sort of "hitter" plays in 114 games and racks up 353 plate appearances, it usually adds up to him being one of the worst offensive players in baseball. Among all AL hitters with at least 350 trips to the plate this year, Blanco ranked dead last in batting average and on-base percentage, and 110th in slugging percentage.

Of course, Blanco wasn't brought in for his offense and wasn't brought in to play 114 games, but those things don't really matter when talking about how valuable he was to the team. If you go to a Chinese restaurant and order a hamburger, the quality of your meal isn't determined by whether or not they're known for their hamburgers. I'm not saying Blanco did a horrible job, because obviously the Twins needed someone to take those starts behind the plate, but he played just like he has before, which is why he was available to the Twins as a cheap backup catcher in the first place.

Today at The Hardball Times:
- Running on Empty (by Aaron Gleeman)
- A World of Pain (by Brian Gunn)



*****Comments? Questions? Email me!*****


Monday, October 18, 2004

Cutting Guzman Loose

Minnesota got a head start on what is sure to be another busy offseason by making several moves this weekend, the biggest of which was buying out Cristian Guzman's contract. The Twins declined Guzman's $5.25-million option for 2005 and instead paid him a $700,000 buyout that makes him a free agent. This does not, however, mean that Guzman's days with the Twins are over, because the Twins are free to re-sign him and I suspect that's exactly what they'll try to do.

Guzman's 2004 season was one of the most confusing I've ever witnessed as a baseball fan, because he was really not significantly better than he was in past years, when he was criticized quite often, but the difference this year was that he got tons of praise from both Twins fans and the local media.

Here's what Guzman has done offensively over the last three years:
YEAR       G      AVG      OBP      SLG      OPS      GPA     VORP

2002 148 .273 .292 .385 .677 .228 11.7
2003 143 .268 .311 .365 .676 .231 12.7
2004 145 .274 .309 .384 .693 .235 14.8
Not only wasn't Guzman's 2004 season significantly better than the two years that came before it, the consistency of his mediocrity is remarkable. What the Twins have gotten from Guzman over the last three years is a guy who will miss 15-20 games a year with various injuries and benchings, hit an incredibly empty .270, draw one walk a week, and produce 10-15 runs more than a replacement-level shortstop.

His defense is where it gets interesting. I personally thought that Guzman's defense was improved this year, but that he was still average, at best. Several defensive metrics agree that he was improved, but instead have the improvement being huge.
YEAR     FRAA     FWS

2002 -1 7.7
2003 -5 7.0
2004 17 9.6
"FRAA" stands for Fielding Runs Above Average, a Baseball Prospectus stat that attempts to measure how many runs a player was worth defensively over an average player at the same position. This is a stat in which Guzman made a massive improvement, going from -5 and -1 in 2002 and 2003 to +17 this year.

"FWS" stands for Fielding Win Shares, which is a Bill James creation (as part of his overall Win Shares) that we track over at The Hardball Times. Like with FRAA, Guzman made a major improvement in Fielding Win Shares, going from 7.7 and 7.0 in 2002 and 2003 to 9.6 this year, which actually led all major-league shortstops.

The problem, as has been explained to me by people with much bigger brains, is that stats like FRAA and Fielding Win Shares simply estimate the number of opportunities a player gets defensively, which limits the accuracy of the numbers. There are, however, other defensive metrics that examine actual play-by-play data for exact figures, rather than estimates.

The most mainstream of those is Zone Rating, which measures the percentage of balls hit into a player's defensive "zone" that the player makes a play on. Guzman's Zone Rating this year (.823), while up up, ranked just ninth among everyday AL shortstops and was not meaningfully higher than his Zone Rating last season (.821), when no one praised him for anything other than the quality of his wizard-beard.

Over at Baseball Think Factory, Chris Dial has a defensive metric called the Dial Player Index that uses the Zone Rating numbers that are generated from play-by-play data. DPI has Guzman as improved this season, going from -15 and -11 in 2002 and 2003 to -7 this year, but still well below average. As Chris told me last night when I asked him for his figures for Guzman: "He did play 'better,' but still poorly."

Another defensive metric, Mitchel Lichtman's Ultimate Zone Rating (UZR), uses detailed play-by-play and hit-location data for real opportunity numbers, but then takes it a step further by attempting to adjust for the difficulty of each opportunity. Guzman was awful in 2002 and 2003, checking in at -19 and -17 per 150 games, but is at +2 in Lichtman's initial numbers this season (he told me he still has some adjustments to make before releasing his "final" 2004 numbers).

This is a perfect example of the problems many people, myself included, tend to have with defensive stats. Even the best of them -- and the ones I've mentioned are definitely very good -- sometimes come up with numbers that can't help but bring up major issues. In this case, my issue is with the fact that, prior to this season, Guzman's defense was shown to be very poor by nearly every advanced defensive metric.

Now the numbers show that he made a complete turnaround in just one year, going from horrible to great in FRAA, average to great in Fielding Win Shares, and horrendous to above average in UZR. Only DPI shows him as still being below average. Now, it's certainly possible that those numbers are legit, but I have a hard time believing it's just a coincidence that Guzman's gigantic improvements came in the same season that the old, fast Metrodome turf was replaced with new, slower turf, and the Twins went from having a fly ball pitching staff to a ground ball pitching staff.

Perhaps in past years Guzman was unfairly penalized for having few opportunities (because of the fly ball pitching staff) and those opportunities being very difficult ones (because of the fast turf). Or perhaps now Guzman is being unfairly credited with having lots of opportunities (because of the ground ball staff) and those opportunities being easy ones (because of the slow turf). Or maybe it's neither of those things, but either way something just doesn't seem right to me.

How does a guy go from being -22, -20, -19 and -17 in UZR from 2000-2003 to being +2 in 2004? How does he go from being -12, -15, -8, -1 and -5 in FRAA from 1999-2003 to being +17 in 2004? How about from being in the middle of the pack in Fielding Win Shares to leading all of baseball? I suppose I might be willing to write it all off to legitimate improvements or a "career year," if not for the changes in turf and the Twins' pitching staff.

All of which is a very long way of saying that it is no longer easy to say that "Guzman stinks offensively" and also add in "and defensively too." It might still be true, but there is now some doubt. Hell, it might never have been true, if you really want to give Guzman the benefit of that doubt. When all else fails, of course, I go back to what my admittedly untrained eyes tell me, which is that Guzman is, at best, an average defender.

There is no doubt that Guzman has the skills to be a very good player, and he has certainly shown that potential many times during his six years with the Twins. However, he turns 27 next year, he doesn't seem like a particularly hard worker, and he doesn't strike me as someone in any danger of making huge strides as a player. At this point, he is what he is: a slight above/below average shortstop, both offensively and defensively, who does enough things well to make you want to kill him when he makes a mental error, bounces a lazy lob throw over to first base, or pops up a bunt in a key spot.

The Twins have a shortstop prospect named Jason Bartlett, who hit .331/.415/.472 at Triple-A this year and .296/.380/.425 at Double-A in 2003. I'm probably a bigger Bartlett fan than most people and I think he will eventually be a very solid everyday middle infielder in the majors. However, I'm not certain that his future position is shortstop and I'm even less certain that he would be able to step in for Guzman next year and perform adequately.

What the Twins need to weigh is just how far away they think Bartlett is and, if he's not ready, just how much of a dropoff Nick Punto and Augie Ojeda would be from Guzman at shortstop. Yet another consideration is who they might be able to get cheaply on the free agent market. Is Guzman worth $2 million more than those options? How about $3 million? They've clearly decided that he's not worth $5.25 million more, which, as I told people all season despite plenty of disagreement, was a no-brainer.

I'd love to see the Twins sign Omar Vizquel to a one-year deal, I wouldn't mind seeing Guzman back for $2 million or so, and I'd have no problem going into next spring with Bartlett, Punto, Ojeda and perhaps a cheap veteran free agent battling for the everyday shortstop job, assuming the money saved could be spent wisely somewhere else. Ultimately, what Terry Ryan does between now and the start of next season will determine how people view the decision to cut Guzman loose, but choosing not to devote 10% of the team's payroll to him is smart move regardless of what happens next.

Today at The Hardball Times:
- Hope For The Forsaken (by Larry Mahnken)
- Tied in Texas (by Brian Gunn)



*****Comments? Questions? Email me!*****