Banny Days Are Here Again
Posted: June 2nd, 2008 | Filed under: Banny Log | 28 Comments »
Start No. 12: Vs. Cleveland Indians
Innings: 7 1/3
Earned runs allowed: 1.
Strikeouts: 4
Walks: 1
Homers: 1
Decision: Win (5-6)
Number of pitches: 103
Number of strikes: 70
BABIP: .227 (5 for 22)
Season BABIP: .285
Brian Bannister was at his Banny best on Sunday, moving the ball around, changing speeds, getting out of a little jams. The one run he gave up was on a home run to Grady Sizemore in the eighth inning — Sizemore has now hit five home runs against the Royals this year. I have absolutely no idea why he is not hitting third in that suddenly dreadful Indians lineup. No idea. More on that in a minute.
I did not think that Royals manager Trey Hillman would pitch Banny in the eighth. He had thrown seven shutout innings, he’d gotten the Indians 1-2-3 in the seventh, Kansas City led 6-0, the bullpen was in good shape, the Royals have a day off today … seemed like a good time to take Banny out, leave him with a positive feeling for the next start. Banny had obviously been scuffling a little bit, he had not won a game in three weeks, he’d had some late inning woes … you know, I was absolutely sure Banny would not come out to start the eighth inning.
But … Banny had only thrown 97 pitches, and he was overpowering in the seventh, so Trey figured he had one more inning with him. Well, as the world’s biggest Brian Bannister fan — seriously, his DAD wouldn’t blog about him every start — I would like to offer the Skipper this general rule that he can use pretty much any time he is grappling with a decision: “Brian Bannister does not have one more inning in him.â€
I don’t want that to sound like a knock … it isn’t. We all know the challenges Brian faces. He’s trying to win without the 95-mph fastball, without the nasty breaking ball (though he did uncork a Joakim Soria slow curve a couple of times on Sunday — a new weapon?), without being lefthanded, without a lot of stuff. He is effective with movement, with guile, with a gameplan and with a better-than-you-think fastball that cuts late. It’s often good two to three times through the lineup. At that point, though, batters might start noticing the mirrors, where the trap doors, who the magician planted in the audience.
Here are a few 2008 stats from Baseball Reference … small sample size but I think they’re pretty revealing.
Batters vs. Banny
Innings 1-3: .243/.295/.360
Innings 4-6: .271/.310/.347
Innings 7-9: .294/.333/.622
Notice, especially, that slugging percentage late. That’s a key, key number with Banny. We all know he does not strike out a lot of hitters, so it’s critical for pitching success that he does not give up extra base hits. In the early innings, when his fastball is really moving and cutting, Banny generally does not give up a lot of hard hit balls. But late … here’s the same story told through pitch count:
Batters vs. Banny
Pitches 1-25: .238/.284/.333
Pitches 26-50: .253/.300/.400
Pitches 51-75: .221/.284/.324
Pitches 76-100: .290/.319/.391
Pitches 101+: .438/.444/.813
It didn’t really matter on Sunday. Banny started the eighth, got one out, gave up a solo homer to Grady, and got taken out — no real harm. But it just seemed unnecessary … I think with Banny, like with any good magician, one of the keys is getting off stage before the audience catches on.
* * *
That Indians lineup really is brutal — it’s hard to believe that a lineup with the same core players scored 870 runs in 2006. Then again, it really isn’t that hard to believe when you look at the numbers so far — the 2008 numbers are projections:
Grady Sizemore
2006: .290/.375/.533, 53 doubles, 11 triples, 28 homers, 134 runs.
2008: .258/.371/.488, 33 doubles, 6 triples, 33 homers, 95 runs.
Victor Martinez
2006: .316/.391/.465, 37 doubles, 16 homers, 93 RBIs, 82 runs.
2008: .292/.333/.351, 34 doubles, 0 homers, 61 RBIs, 38 runs (!)
Travis Hafner
2006: .308/.439/.659, 31 doubles, 1 triple, 42 homers, 117 RBIs, 100 runs.
2008: .217/.326./350, 30 doubles, 0 triples, 13 homers, 73 RBIs, 63 runs
Casey Blake
2006: .282/.356/.479, 20 doubles, 1 triple, 19 homers, 68 RBIs, 63 runs in 400 at-bats.
2008: .225/.311/.369, 35 doubles, 13 homers, 92 RBIs, 70 runs in 500 at-bats.
And so on. Sizemore’s numbers are not so much down as they are different — he’s walking more, hitting fewer doubles and triples, banging more home runs, that’s why I think he makes much more sense as a No. 3 hitter. Martinez inexplicably has lost his power and Blake, who has been one of my favorite players, is 34 and his numbers figure to keep on falling.
And that leads us to to the big guy, Hafner, who continues his rapid decline into the abyss. You know, there’s an interesting discussion going over at my buddy Alex Belth’s site about whether or not Derek Jeter is finished as a great player. We’ve had more than our share of Jeter talk over here, but I think there’s something larger worth talking about. We baseball fans understand on an intellectual level that players generally start declining at a much younger age than we were led to believe. Bill James proved pretty convincingly that the old idea that a player’s prime years are age 27-32 is nonsense, and that at 30 and 31 the majority of players — especially players with old player skills* — tend to start declining and declining fast.
*This is a Bill James concept — that players with power and plate discipline, players who don’t necessarily hit for a high average and don’t have any speed — will decline much faster than others. And by “much faster†I mean “will decline so fast you will not even believe it.†Take Tom Brunansky … please.
Age 31: .266/.354/.445, 118 OPS+ in 450 or so at-bats.
Age 32: .183/..265/.321, 58 OPS+ in 200 or so at-bats.
Age 34: Out of baseball.
Yeah, like that. Bruno may have had injuries — I’m actually not sure — but that’s not an atypical decline for someone with old-player skills.
While we understand this intellectually, it’s much tougher emotionally. It’s tougher to believe that just because a guy turns 32 — or 34, or 37 or whatever that expiration date is for that player — that he will suddenly not be as good. But it’s just a hard fact of baseball life. Here we go around the horn with a few players in their 30s. Obviously, we’re only a third of the way through season, but it’s interesting just the same:
1B: Paul Konerko, Age 32
Numbers: .205/.320/.335
Comment: Old player skills (though he has hit for average in the past) … this might be a real decline.
2B: Jeff Kent, Age 40
Numbers: .250/.279/.339
Comment: This is not so much about old-player skills; Kent is just an old player. He actually put up good numbers in 2007, but it’s a funny thing about age … you never know when it’s going to get you. I like to think of age in terms of football cornerbacks. One day, you can no longer stay with receivers. And when that day comes — you’re old and you will never, ever be young again. Sigh.
SS: Derek Jeter, Almost 34
Numbers: .271/.329/.382
Comment: I know people here think I don’t like Jeter (I do!) so my opinion about him will probably not be taken seriously. And, unlike many, I think he will be a very good player for a few more years — I think his bad start this year is only that, a bad start. He very clearly does NOT have old player skills, and he does play hard and with a lot of intuition, so I think he should age pretty gracefully. But, let’s face it, he will turn 34 this month. That’s old for a baseball player, and older for a shortstop. There have not been many good-to-great 35 year old shortstops in baseball history. So I do think his days as an MVP candidate, a .340 hitter with 40 doubles and 20 homers are probably over. And at some point, the Yankees are going to have to face up to reality and move him from short … and that does not figure to be a happy day. Fortunately for the Yankees, Julio Lugo is playing shortstop in Boston, and he’s so brutal that Jeter can’t help but look good by comparison.*
*It’s like the cruel but hilarious old Garry Shandling line about how they purposely hire scary looking waiters and waitresses at Denny’s. This, he says, is to make the food look better.
Customer: “This omelet looks terrible.â€
Waitress (holding the plate up by her face): “How about now?â€
Customer: “Um, OK, give it to me.â€
3B: Rich Aurillia, 36
Numbers: .245/.314/.396
Comment: This aging process began in earnest two years ago … just in time for the brilliant Giants to give him one more fat deal.
OF: Ken Griffey, 38
Numbers: .256/.343/.402
Comment: We’re about at the end of a beautiful Hall of Fame career that might have been even more special had young Griffey not suffered the injuries. I suspect he will still want to play — even in a reduced role — for a couple more years.
OF: Eric Byrnes, 32
Numbers: .219/.285/.388
Comment: Don’t you find it bizarre and funny that last year, at age 31, Eric Byrnes stole 50 bases even though he had never stolen more than 25 bases in a season before? Byrnes, of course, spent his younger days with the Moneyball A’s, who did not steal bases. So you almost got the feeling that when he got on the bases last year he felt like a thoroughbred finally being given the chance to run — you could almost hear him shouting, “I’m free! I’m free!†This year, Byrnes is on pace to steal 12 bases and be caught nine times, which isn’t as good.
OF: Gary Matthews, 33
Numbers: .215/.303/.344
Comment: Not sure if this is so much a case of a player aging and declining as it is a player who just cashed in one one good season in Texas (and one amazing catch that they showed on television over and over and over and over and over …).
C: Pudge v2.0, 36
Numbers: .251/.289/.366
Comment: Good! I can feel your anger! I am defenseless! Strike me down with all your hatred, and your journey toward Butch Wynegar will be complete.
DH: Travis Hafner, 31
Comment: Of course. The ultimate example of baseball aging. He (surely) will have his hot streaks again, but I think the trend is pretty clear now. He had a huge dropoff in 2007, and he’s hand an even larger dropoff in 2008, and I just don’t think that turns back around.
Loading ...
All this talk of player decline and not even a nod to steroids and the increased testing and perceived social cost of using? Pudge has deflated since testing began and played in Texas with several noted cheats.
Look I have no idea who used and who didn’t (which may be why you don’t mention it — you responsible journalist you), but for a while there players didn’t seem to age, and now they are. Causal relationship, maybe. But there is definitely a correlation.
Pudge is the perfect rebuttal to James’ “old player skills” theory. Pudge never had the #1 old player skill: plate discipline. He was talented enough to overcome that flaw for a long time. Now that the talent is fading (be it due to age or the lack of performance-enhancing drugs), he has nothing to fall back on. He’s swinging at the same bad pitches he did when he was a .320 hitter–he’s just missing almost all of them now.
I will say, however, that his defense has been superb this year and has actually kept the Tigers record from being a couple games worse than it already is.
Mr. Posnanski,
Great Banny log. I’m with you on the late-innings rule. And those slugging percentage numbers for innings 7-9 are not a good sign. Then again, how many times has he made it into those innings—and how do his numbers compare to other Royals and MLB starting pitchers? In sum, is the sample size too small to say he can’t pitch late—that the magic wears off?
- TL
Nice to see Brian put it all together again and even nicer to see the team do the same.
References to Garry Shandling and Tom Brunansky in the same post. That is awesome!
Hafner, Hafner, Hafner – exactly what’s wrong with this guy? And speaking of bloated, team-finance-crippling contracts, how about the Indians signing Hafner for $57M three months into his “slump” and fully 18 months before he was free agency eligible? Almost $13M per year for an end-of-the-bench paperweight. Truly a Buddy Bavasi-esque move.
And thanks for answering this year’s number one baseball question: who’s the worst team in the AL? After this weekend the answer is clear – the Cleveland Indians.
i just figured all these guys did steroids :/
I’d have liked to see Big Papi on the list but to date, it wouldn’t have supported the fast decline theory (come see me again though if, knock wood, he’s got a serious wrist injury). Also curious what you think of Manny’s future path. He just turned 36 and seems to be back to MBM again. Certainly fits the “old player” description though, power, discipline, lack of speed. But then again when you are one of the greatest righthanded hitters in history, maybe your decline phase won’t be very typical either.
This might sound crazy, but I’ve long thought Hafner was overrated. He’s already in decline?? I keep waiting for him to hit his peak. The way I hear people talk about him, I figure there’s something better coming from him. I never saw him as a #4 hitter, maybe that’s why. To me, he’s more of a #6 or #7 guy. I think people were overimpressed by his 2006. But as for Banny….
Do you think he’d make a great bullpen guy? You just made a good case for it. Perhaps he’d be a great setup man for Soria. Of course, the Royals need starters right now, but…Banny is best one time through the lineup. Long setup man maybe? Don’t comment on this… think about it, work out some stats, come up with some ideas, and blog it. I’m curious what your long answer would be on this idea.
Sheffield, Andruw, Delgado, Thome, all could be added to the list.
In regards to Banny’s outing I agree with Joe on trotting him out for another inning. Not smart. Was anyone else sitting on the edge of the couch, or their seat at the ballpark, in the ninth? The bullpen is still scary, save Soria.
I was listening to 810 radio the other day, and somebody said that Banny’s struggles are due to the fact that he is a ground ball pitcher, and the ground balls are just finding gaps now. just a thought.
Editor’s note: No offense to 810 … but Banny is not a ground ball pitcher.
@Devon:
2004: .311/.410/.583, OPS+162
2005: .305/.408/.595, OPS+168
2006: .308/.439/.659, OPS+179
You thought he was overrated? You never saw him as a #4 hitter? I would say you definitively lose at player evaluation. Sheesh.
Sizemore leads off because he leads the team in OBP (.371) and can run (13 SB, 2 CS). The stealing is just a minor issue: the Getting On Base is the main thing. Look at Cleveland’s roster and tell me who else can lead off. Francisco, perhaps, at .347 … but his SLG is higher than Sizemore’s, it’s kind of the same issue either way. Everyone else … EVERYONE else … has an OBP .333 or lower … and the .333 is Victor Martinez, who is slower than Steve Balboni … is NOW.
Sizemore can bat third when we have a real leadoff hitter. And a real #2 hitter. And a real #5, #6, #7, #8, and #9 hitter. (Actually, we prolly have six or seven legitimate #9 hitters.)
It’s hard to argue with the numbers, and yet a mind doesn’t want to believe that a guy can be SO FRAKKIN’ AWESOME two years ago (Hafner) and is now just dogmeat. It’s just two years! I didn’t feel much different two years ago, and I’m older than Hafner is. Ofcourse, all I do all day is sit on my ass staring at a computer screen.
The scary thing for the Yankees is that Jeter might very well be on the decline and that it?
I wonder how this will effect the baseball market in general, now that more and more teams are figuring this out, and fewer and fewer players use steroids to mask the effects of old age. Will trading a prospect for a veteran soon become taboo, no matter how great the veteran and how mediocre the prospect?
Will teams sign the Evan Longoria’s of the world to an 8 year deal, use them up, then cut them loose, never to play again?
Interesting times.
My post above got cut short for some reason….
———
The scary thing for the Yankees is that Jeter might very well be on the decline and that soon his contract is up. So they’ll have to sign him to a new one. Seeing what Posada, and A-Rod, and Rivera got, what’s Jeter going to get? 8/200? They can’t give him much less, can they? He’s their star, the guy they defer everything for, even letting him play SS despite having a much better SS on their team.
The mind shudders at how horribly, horribly, HORRIBLY overpaid he’s going to be in 2013. At which point he’ll play either LF or RF, and be slugging .380.
That said, how well is A-Rod going to do? He’s reached the fall-off age. Obviously his skills aren’t just old player skills, but still. The Yankees are paying him for 50+ homers/ 150 RsBI / 150 Runs scored a season. How many more times are they going to get it?
My brother coaches high school baseball out in San Diego and talked to Brunansky at a game last year. Bruno has a son that plays in Poway and helps out as a volunteer coach. My brother said he’s a very nice down to earth guy and they talked a lot about the ‘87 Twins team. No word about his rapid decline as a hitter though.
I lost all respect for the Indians after their husband-after-sex roll over to the Red Sox in last years ALCS. I’m glad we broke the string against them. Now for Chicago, which promises to be an important series. How will the Royals respond to a match-up of real significance in the standings? Let’s find out… Thank gawd Grienke is starting game one.
old-man computer skills:
got suckered into leaving XP for Vista
like Mac OS even better
think MS Hearts is an exciting game
have forgotten how to find free nudes
took me 3 tries to bookmark the best blog (Poz)
“have forgotten how to find free nudes”
HAHA, but seriously, how horrible this world will be when/if I reach old-man computer skills and can’t find free nudes…
A bit off track but here goes…
Sometimes I think – let’em use steroids. The fact is there is little to NO evidence that adults 21-35 who use steroids and other PED’s under the close guidance of people who know what they’re doing (BALCO) develop serious health issues. Just agressively test in High School and NCAA so at least we know our pro athletes did have some God given talent to rise to the top of that amateur level.
This pro-roid voice loved the McGwire / Sosa home run show and the super human Barry and watching players I like perform well into their later years. Hell, I even like imagining my childhood faves and old school players like – Rose, Yaz, Rice, Ruth, Aaron, Mays – and what kind of numbers and games would they have put up if they had the Balco chemists working with them. Ruth on ‘Roids? Aaron on Roids? 920 HR’s?
And just now I had a thought – oh no – is baseball going to return to the 70’s era of Mark Belangers and Denny Doyle’s and 30 home runs as a “monster” year and George Foster hitting 50 is like a cosmic happening. Because honestly, I like offense in the game. Don’t get me wrong, I love a shut-out and a pitcher’s duel but seeing a home-run as often as Haley’s comet is not my idea of a great past time.
And then there’s another voice. And it’s a bit louder and easier to hear saying, what are you nuts? It’s gotta be clean, it’s gotta be an even playing field, records need to have a standard of integrity but I wonder… Is this really practical?
Is hoping our pro sports become and remain perfectly clean forever sort of like the ‘war on drugs’ in general… Futile? Are we all just Sisyphus, pushing the rock up the mountain over and over and over again…?
Maybe we ought to let’em do what they want with their bodies and sit back and enjoy the show?
Joe, I know this many posts ago but Chipper just waved Tex and Frenchy to third and second respectively ala Jeter. It was rough, Tex was wondering about his contract (Boras was in the stands talking to Cashman on one phone and and Minaya on the other) and Frenchy was wondering why his average was so low even though he was walking more. Of course the Braves didn’t turn Chipper’s play into a run, Mac got hit by a pitch next and then there was a deep fly out. But Jeter Jones, I mean Chipper was awesome. At doing his job.
I don’t disagree with the “old player skills” argument in general, but I think you picked a couple of unfortunate examples, Joe. For instance, citing Brunansky and then claiming that his rapid decline wasn’t atypical of someone with his skills doesn’t quite hold water. Take the guys listed as having the highest career Similarity Scores to Brunansky. Here are their OPS+ marks starting at age 31, the same age as Brunansky’s last good season:
Frank Thomas (no, not that one) – 85, 121, 118, 104, 102, 70
Deron Johson – 112, 135, 84, 108, 57, 92
Ben Oglivie – 153, 107, 118, 129, 100, 117
Jeff Burroughs – 145, 107, 96, 114, retired
Jeromy Burnitz – 106, 119, 80, 105, 121, 94
Larry Parrish – 102, 128, 112, 73, retired
Bill Nicholson – 95, 123, 124, 99, 101, 114
Doug DeCinces – 149, 126, 109, 105, 112, 95
Jim Wynn – 107, 151, 133, 108, 46, retired
Bobby Thomson – 98, 94, 90, 116, 92, 93
As you can see, most of these guys played with a respectable level of productivity well past the point where Brunansky’s career fell apart. Only three retired early, as Brunansky did, but all three maintained at least league-average production well after Brunansky lost it. I’m not saying that a fall like Brunansky’s is completely unheard of; a couple of guys who were similar to Brunansky through age 31, like Johnny Callison and Greg Luzinski, were finished by age 34 too. But those guys and Brunansky really are pretty atypical. Most guys with those skills see a decline in productivity, as you mentioned, but they don’t completely lose the ability to play before turning 34, like Brunansky did. He was atypical.
And while Hafner is certainly a classic candidate to suffer Old Player Syndrome, he’s pretty atypical too. None of the guys who had the most similar careers to Hafner through age 30 suffered such a drastic decline as he has at such an early age:
OPS+ marks starting at age 31:
Jim Gentile – 125, 107, retired
Dick Stuart – 118, 101, 97, retired
Brian Giles – 177, 145, 145, 128, 146…you get the idea
Dolph Camilli – 138, 145, 147, 165…you get the idea
Gus Zernial – 99, 115, 99, 104, 130, 79
Tony Clark – 100, 95, 154, 60, 103, 83
Bob Johnson – 147, 141, 155, 129, and so on
Moose Skowron – 115, 60, 108, 116, 98, 55
Trot Nixon – 109, 96, 78, retired?
Andre Thornton – 94, 137, 123, 132, 94, 99
See? Not a lot of guys in that group dropping from a 179 OPS+ to 85 within two seasons, and certainly not as young as age 31. Sure, some of them fizzled out early, but none of them cracked off three straight seasons with OPS+ marks of 162 or better, either. Hafner’s drop-off is so sharp that if it’s due to nothing more than having old player skills, than it’s possibly the most drastic and sudden fall of its kind in baseball history.
There’s an important distinction between “young players with old player skills”, like, say, Pronk or Jack Cust or suchlike, and guys who are just old, like Sheffield or Kent. Hafner would most likely be starting his decline phase anyway, but the fact that his shoulder is currently made of linguine probably isn’t helping, either. I don’t think steroids are anywhere in most of these particular equations.
I’m with those of you who think this decline is due to steroids. I don’t think there is any other way to explain the rapid descent of so many players when this has never happened previously. I mean sure homers may go down, but these batting averages have fallen off a cliff!
I’m too lazy to look it up, but I think Hack Wilson was the poster boy for old player syndrome.
Just a note on Jeter… he was at .314/.349/.429 when he was hit by a pitch on the wrist, and proceeded to go 8 for 47 since then. This year may not be his drop off year, so much as he was injured by that pitch.
Greg Luzinski. Bob Horner. Greg Kittle. Bob Hamelin. Glenn Davis. Gorman Thomas. All of them had careers that pretty much fell off a cliff in their early thirties, just like Hafner. The list goes on…
The reason we don’t remember it “ever happening before” is that we only remember the superstars. The guys who flamed out fade from memory so we can’t recall their falls from grace. We’re just more attuned to it now because we’re watching more closely, and because we’re lumping guys with old player skills in with guys who are actually, you know, old.
Blaming everything on steroids is lazy thinking and baseless cheapshotting. Guys are allowed to suck for all sorts of non-pharmaceutical reasons – age, injury, improved scouting reports, loss of a favorite coach or comfortable hitting environment, the discovery of a magical fountain of pie (c.f. Jones, Andrew). At a time when we haven’t even figured out what, if any, effect steroids and HGH have on baseball skills, broad-brush tarring every declining player with the steroids label in the absence of any proof is ridiculous.
Maybe they just like pie.
So I do think his days as an MVP candidate, a .340 hitter with 40 doubles and 20 homers are probably over. And at some point, the Yankees are going to have to face up to reality and move him from short
Where do you move Jeter? Ugh.
With numbers like .271/.329/.382, he could *only* be valuable as a SS, but since he’s terrible defensively, those numbers don’t even have value there. Getting that kind of production from a corner outfielder (or heavens, a 1B man) leads to a KC Royals-type offense…