Pedro Feliz, Houston
Posted: March 13th, 2010 | Filed under: Baseball | 71 Comments »
Before we get into Pedro Feliz — and I will admit you have to work through a few things before we get to him — I have a question for you: Let’s say you’re a manager of a Major League baseball team in 2009. And before the game, a genie says to you that you can have one of two things happen. (1) Your team could have more hits than the opponent or (2) Your team could hit three or more home runs.
Which of those two options would give you a better chance of winning?
* * *
There are many things I love about reading the words of my friend Bill James. But I think the thing I love most is that whenever I read anything by him — an essay, a blurb, an email, whatever — I find that it sparks me to write something. I’ve never really talked with Bill about this, but to me that is a unique quality of his writing: A reader feeds off it. To read Bill is to have a conversation with him. He writes interactively.
I thought about this again the other day when I was reading an essay in The Bill James Gold Mine 2010, and I came across the most perfect sentence I’ve read about the problem with RBIs.
As you probably know, the problem with RBIs and the similar problem with pitcher wins have been two of the hotter topics on this blog for a long time. Bill actually begins the essay — which is called “The Attribution Problem (in Baseball and in Life) — by talking about pitcher wins. He writes:
We attribute the victory won by the team to the individual pitcher — and then conclude, based essentially on that attribution, that the pitcher is the key to victory.
That sums it up pretty well, doesn’t it? The win is all about sleight of hand. Pitchers don’t win games, and pitchers don’t lose games — that should be obvious to everyone. But people decided a long time ago just the opposite: That pitchers do win and lose games. We actually credit them with wins and losses. And based on that decision we have made many suspect judgments through the years based on little evidence — such as the dubious idea that pitchers can “pitch to the score,” or the concept that some pitchers are “Just winners,” or the various calculations that estimate pitching is 60% of baseball or 75% of baseball or 90% of baseball.
Similar thing with RBIs — though I think the attribution problem is even more stark with RBIs. At least with wins and losses, hey, a pitcher does have quite a lot of control over the run prevention half of baseball. He doesn’t do it alone, not even close to alone. He will rely on his defense, and he will rely on his ballpark, and he will rely on his catcher, and he will rely on whoever is calling pitches, and he will rely on luck and countless other things, but few would argue with the premise that when it comes to stopping the other team’s offense, you begin with the pitcher.
The RBI guy, though, is not necessarily the most important guy when it comes to scoring runs. It SEEMS that he is because that’s what we are conditioned to believe. We are taught, throughout our baseball fan lives, to lionize the big-time RBI players. We have been conditioned — by MVP votes, by fantasy baseball, by all the stories in newspapers about “productive” hitters, by announcer voices that celebrate the clutch hits — to believe that runs, for the most part, come about because of the hitter who drives them in.
But it really isn’t so. Take this situation: One out, Rick Manning cracks a line drive single. Duane Kuiper hits a high chopper in front of the plate, he’s out, but Manning takes second. Jim Norris, with first base open and two outs, works for a walk. Manning and Norris move up on a wild pitch. Pitcher works around Andre Thornton, and he walks. Then, with a 3-1 count and the bases loaded, the pitcher has to throw a fastball that catches too much of the plate, and Rico Carty rolls a single between short and third, scoring two runs.
That’s a fairly typical sequence, I would guess. In our mind and in our statbook, Carty is the hero — two RBIs. He is, in fan and media shorthand, RESPONSIBLE for those runs. But he isn’t. Carty’s single didn’t make those two runs happen. Those two runs scored because of a series of events, and Carty’s single was just the last of those events.
And this is the point: Teams don’t score runs because they have uniquely talented RBI men. Teams score runs because more often than their opponents, they put together a string of useful offensive plays — walks, hits, stolen bases, hit-by-pitch, beating out double play grounders, taking extra bases, advancing on throws , on and on and on. That, most of the time, is what lead to runs.* The RBI guy cannot do it himself except with solo home runs. And teams don’t win games by hitting solo home runs. No, really, they don’t. I looked it up. In 2009, offenses that scored all their runs on solo home runs were 24-193. Houston lost a game to Cincinnati 6-5 while hitting five solo home runs. For the decade, teams relying entirely on solo home runs went 267-1837.**
*You can reduce the confusion and make it pretty simple, really. Here’s a Bill James stat to think about, and it focuses only on hits: How often does a team win when they get more hits than their opponents? Well, in 2009 the answer: 80.3% of the time. Teams won four out of five games when they got more hits than their opponents. How remarkable is this? Well, I’m glad you asked — we go back to the trivia question at the top. You’re a manager of a baseball team, and before the game the genie gives you the choice: You can either outhit your opponent tonight or you can hit three or more homers tonight … which one would be more likely to bring you the victory.
And since I gave you the lead, you already know the answer:
Teams that outhit their opponents won 80.3% of the time.
Teams that hit three-or-more homers won 78.4% of the time.
**And for the record: Only one team in baseball since 1954 scored exclusively on six solo home runs in a game — the 1991 Oakland A’s. They lost 8-6 to Minnesota.
So, my point is, that people have through the years counted RBIs and celebrated RBIs and given too much credit to to the men who knock them in. And, as a result, many people have come to determine that RBI men are the most valuable part of an offense. That’s the circular thinking we have here.
Well, I have been bouncing around this topic for a long time, never quite getting to the heart of things. And it wasn’t until I read the following sentence from Bill that it all snapped into place for me:
If you add a low-average power hitter to a bad team, the low average power hitter will lead the team in RBI — and the team will score fewer runs, not more.
Bingo. There it is. All this time, I’ve been wondering, for instance, why Jose Guillen’s 97 RBIs for Kansas City in 2008 bothered me so much. I mean, sure, I knew Guillen was mostly crummy that year (a 95 OPS+ despite two extremely hot months). And I knew that those 97 RBIs just felt pointless. But, hey, I’m not immune to the seductive powers of RBIs. I will see 97 RBIs, especially for a Royals player, and think “Well, hey, that’s a lot.” The Royals had not had anyone with more than 86 RBIs since Carlos Beltran and Raul Ibanez left town. So, hey, at least Guillen did that, right?
But it bugged me. And as soon as I read that Bill statement, I instinctively knew why. I went to Baseball Reference, and confirmed what I was thinking.
The Royals without Guillen scored 706 runs in 2007.
The Royals with Guillen’s RBIs scored 691 runs in 2008.
That was it all right. Guillen’s RBIs were an illusion. He did not make the team’s offense any better at all. He may have contributed RBIs — giving the Royals someone to credit for their lousy offense — but he did not contribute any actual improvement to the offense. Frankly, he made the Royals offense worse. Several players — Alex Gordon, David DeJesus, Mike Aviles — had markedly better years than in 2007. But the Royals had Jose Guillen and his dreadful .300 on-base percentage hitting in the middle of the lineup. He drove in runs. But he did not help.
This is not an uncommon theme in baseball history. Bad teams (and, to be fair, mediocre and good teams too) often will fall for the allure of the RBI guy. A middle of the order bat. A producer. And, hey, it can help you if you get an RBI guy who is also, you know, a GOOD HITTER, you know, someone who hits for an average and gets on base and slugs and all that. But the teams aren’t necessarily looking for good. No. They are looking for “productive.” They are looking for RBI men.
After winning 89 games during the 1989 season, San Diego felt like it needed a middle-of-the-order bat, so the Padres traded for RBI guru Joe Carter. And Carter did exactly what they hoped he would do — he drove in 115 RBIs. Unfortunately, he also punched up an 85 OPS+ … and the Padres dropped from fifth to eighth in runs scored and and finished 75-87.
Just before the 1992 season started — I mean just before, on March 30 — the Chicago White Sox determined they needed a middle of the order bat to make a run. So they traded for George Bell, a guy who had driven in more than 85 RBIs for eight straight seasons. And it worked: Bell drove in 112 RBIs for the White Sox. Trouble is, he had a 99 OPS+. He was a below average hitter. The White Sox scored 20 fewer runs and won one less game.
And, of course, one of the players they included in that deal: Sammy Sosa.
In 2004, the Montreal Expos signed Tony Batista to a contract, and then batted him third or fourth, and why not? He bashed 32 home runs! He drove in 110 RBIs! Great year! Unfortunately, his on-base percentage was .272, and the Expos scored 76 fewer runs than they had the year before.
I’m not doing a full study on this … I’m sure there are some counter-examples of low-on base percentage guys with a lot of RBIs who helped a team. Maybe. But there are probably not many. It’s pretty well documented that scoring runs is a process of getting on base and advancing on the bases. There are more accurate ways to figure it, like Base Runs, but if you simply multiply on-base percentage by total bases — that basic version of runs created — you will come pretty close to the number of runs a team scores. This really isn’t a mystery.
So, no, low average, low-on-base guys simply do not help the offense very much, even if they have a lot of RBIs. They just don’t. In their case, the RBI numbers is a deception. Now, it should be pointed out that the most big RBI men are also good or great hitters. But I would argue that RBIs are a by-product of their greatness, not the root. Willie Mays wasn’t great because he drove in 100 runs 10 times. He drove in 100 runs 10 times because he was great.
All of which (finally) brings us to Houston’s new third baseman Pedro Feliz. You know the Astros signed Feliz during the off-season for $4.5 million — he was the big offensive acquisition for a team that finished 14th in the league last year in runs scored. Now, I should start by saying the Feliz is not without value. He is an excellent defensive third baseman. He has never won a Gold Glove, but I think he should have won in 2007 for sure, and he had a strong case the previous two years. He does not seem quite as mobile now — he used to be the best in baseball at charging the bunt; now, not so much — but he’s still awfully good defensively. And he has a great arm. And, by all accounts, he seems a very good guy.
Also, every now and then, his bat will run into a fastball.
OK, those are the positives. Now, the downside: Feliz is a terrible hitter. No, really, dreadful … historically dreadful. The last five years, Feliz has not had an OPS+ of better than 85 in any season. The last four years, his combined OPS+ is 80. His batting Runs Above Replacement? Minus-70.9 for his career. He isn’t just worse offensively than a replacement level player, he’s A LOT worse. His .293 on-base percentage … worst in baseball for the decade (4,000 or more PAs).
Feliz isn’t a bad big league hitter … he’s an atrocious hitter.
BUT … yep, he has some decent-looking RBI numbers. Feliz is the only player in baseball history to have three 80 RBI seasons with sub-85 OPS+. So he’s got that going for him. Among all players with career OPS+ of less than 85 (min. 2,000 plate appearances), only Craig Paquette has more RBIs per plate appearance. Bob Boone used to say that the ball “exploded” off of Craig Paquette’s bat. He said that a lot.
So Feliz is a poor hitter who got enough at-bats on good teams to drive in runs. Pretty obvious, right? Nobody inside baseball would fall for that illusion. Right?
Here’s what it says about Feliz in The Sporting News:
“The Astros moved quickly to sign free-agent third baseman Pedro Feliz who has four 80-RBI seasons on his resume …”
Um. Oh oh. And in The Houston Chronicle:
“Astros general manager Ed Wade is direct with his expectations of Feliz, saying the team projects third base to produce 85 to 90 runs.” This is followed by the writer adding: “A career .254 hitter with a below average on-base percentage of .293, Feliz nonetheless has forged a reputation as a consistent run producer.”
Oh no. And in USA Today, quote after quote about how Feliz’s championship experience in Philadelphia will bring happy intangibles to Houston. And then there’s something in there about how Feliz’s .301 batting average in Houston is the highest he has in any park with at-least 25 at-bats. Not to even get into the silliness of small sample size … do you know what Feliz’s numbers are at Minute Maid Park the last three years? Yep, he’s hitting .250/.298/.295. That’s about what you can expect.
Of course, people have to say nice things … but I don’t think that’s what’s going on here. I think the Astros realistically expect Feliz to help them offensively this year. And I think that is as good sign a sign as any that the Astros are going to have a rough year. It never fails to amaze me how baseball people trying to turn around bad teams have this amazing knack for seeing what they want to see and drawing unlikely conclusions and creating unrealistic happily ever afters. Pedro Feliz cannot hit. At all. He hasn’t been able to hit the last five years, and now he’s getting old which could mean he will hit even less.
But if the Astros hit him 5th or 6th all year, which seems to be the plan, he might drive in 80-plus RBIs. Some people will point to the RBI number and maybe feel good about things. Maybe there will be pressure to bring Feliz back — you can’t let go of a third baseman with 80-plus RBIs! And it will remain a mystery why the Astros don’t actually get any better.
Loading ...
Circle me Jeff Bagwell…
I just read the Gold Mine this week. As in the past, I will set it aside for a week to think about the issues Bill James raises and then I will read it again and will find many pages to fill with marginalia. Bill asks the right questions and then knows how to determine the answers. His Hernandez versus Greinke research concerning 2009 Cy Young winner should bring a post from Posnanski.
Very interesting article Joe.
What I would like to see would be a comparison of a season by a traditionally GOOD hitter with GOOD RBI numbers, who then had another good season but didn’t get the RBI stats – how did this affect his team?
Just curious if you don’t mind running the numbers: how often did teams win last year if they had more players reach base than the other team?
I love this series! Best method for spring training preview ever!
Interesting common sense way to look at the issue, Joe (and Bill James). The first thing that came to mind was the hue and cry over the supposedly lightweight 2010 Red Sox offense, put in such a sorry state because they were too cheap to pony up for noted run producer Jason Bay. This is the meme out there, and it’s probably because they don’t have a guy you’d bet on to drive in 100 runs. Papi hasn’t done it the last two years and doesn’t figure to get the mid-aughts back anytime soon, Youkilis has only done it once, Martinez has done it twice in the last 5 years (though you’d only see one on his baseball card b/c of last year’s split season). Beltre only did it in his enormous fluke year. And of course, nonclutch J.D. Drew who always goes up there looking for a walk has only done it once (and that was the bare minimum 100 on the nose). But if just look outside RBIs, you see a team that will probably send up 6 guys who get on base 35 percent of the time or better, with Cameron and Scutaro slotting in at about .335-.340 and Beltre providing a little pop and a lot of glove. Basically one of the few lineups out there that provides no easy outs, with a fair smattering of both power and speed. They were 4th in runs scored last year and filled in 2 huge gaping holes at C and SS, the former with an All-Star caliber offensive performer and the latter with a guy who will be a solid upgrade at worst, and a real contributor if he can approach what he did last year. Yet most mainstream analysts talk about them like they’re the Giants.
On the hits vs. HRs, I wonder how much of it is a park effect. If you hit 3 HRs in a game, you’re probably in a good home run park, and will probably give up some too. If I was playing in Petco, I think I would want the HRs. It would be interesting to break this down by park and see if there are any differences.
If i were a GM, i probably wouldn’t have Feliz on my team. That being said, watching him in Philly the last couple years, he is truly a pleasure to watch defensively. His glove is slick, his arm in incredible, and his nonchalance after making a slick play is outstanding.
I don’t want to defend his offensive because he swings too much and common sense dictates the risk, but i’d be curious to see his pre- All-star game versus post. It seemed fluky in the first half, for sure, but he did seem to do ok.
Anyone here remember Morgan Ensburg? Whatever happened to him?
just a quick correction/note on
“His batting Wins Above Replacement? Minus-70.9 for his career. He isn’t just worse offensively than a replacement level player, he’s A LOT worse.”
-70.9 is his runs above replacement. Divide by 10 for wins above replacement(10 runs=1 win). So he’s -7.09 WAR
To be fair to Houston, if you take away Figgins and Beltre from the free agent list, there wasn’t much to pick from. I’m assuming they let Tejada go for some unspecified reason (Money?). But after that, Pedro seemed to be the best of what was left.
What I will never understand about the RBI argument is something that I find to be fairly simplistic. Runs can be scored without an RBI being awarded, on errors, on double plays, on wild pitches or passed balls, and some other plays. These runs aren’t worth any less than a run scored on which an RBI is awarded. And yet everyone always talks about the RBI guys as the run producers as opposed to the run scorers (unless your Rickey Henderson or the like).
Being a Royals fan for over 30 years, I have never been enamored with the RBI guys. Brett may have had good RBI numbers, but who wouldn’t with Willie Wilson and Amos Otis hitting in front of him. Look at the Brewers vs Cardinals World Series in 1982. Cards won despite the power of Harvey’s Wallbangers.
Go Small Ball!
“Anyone here remember Morgan Ensburg? Whatever happened to him?”
http://morganensberg.wordpress.com/
Player A without RISP: .292, .346, .506
Player A with RISP: .292, .346, .506
Player A all season: .292, .346, .506
Player B without RISP: .299, .352, .512
Player B with RISP: .279, .332, .497
Player B all season: .292, .346, .506
Which player would you prefer?
I agree totally with the article but I must add there are players who doesn’t bat well with the presure of RISP, and that should be a statistic worth analyzing besides all the other stuff.
In the 2 players fictional example both batted exactly the same in the year but player A was better for the team because he batted in more runs.
I have long understood that Wins and RBIs are a team oriented statistic and have argued with the people who believe they are somehow the be-all and end-all of baseball stats.
I also have not relented whenever I heard the foolish argument that Morris was somehow a HoF pitcher because he “just won” or because he was so good at “pitching to the score.”
However that does NOT make the win or RBI stat useless, even though it certainly is not a good, reliable measurement.
In my opinion, baseball statisticians often err on the side of the purely objective and either ignore or overlook the mental aspects of the game that simply cannot be readily quantified.
Aspects like how some hitters handle the adrenaline and stress of key situations better than others – whether it is because they are not affected at all, like Manny, or because they can focus through those situations like most great hitters generally did.
Or aspects where a pitcher doesn’t have his stuff but stays focused on the game and manages to keep his team in it. Just last year I watched carpenter a couple times when his stuff wasn’t there but he managed to not implode as so many pitchers do in that situation. I hated seeing him without his stuff but appreciated watching him go about his task despite it.
I am 100% certain that there are hitters who do better in clutch situations than other hitters – even though I am certain that no hitter actually gets better in a clutch situation, the way Neyer defines “clutch.”
I am 100% certain that there are pitchers who lose focus and give up more runs than they should mainly because they have a huge lead and are either mentally lazy or following a slightly silly strategy of just throwing it down the middle.
Just as I am 100% certain that there are pitchers who do much, much better when the game is close because they are able to focus on their task more completely.
And I am 100% certain that there are pitchers who can battle harder than others on days when they don’t have their stuff.
The mental side of the game is HUGE and I am 100% certain that joe and bill james and even rob neyer understand that, yet when it cannot be easily and objectively measured, it often gets ignored at best or dismissed at worst.
As a result I think people who see the team aspect of wins and RBIs often go too far in not giving the credit necessary to the individual who are mentally tough.
By all means place the spotlight on silliness like acquiring guillen or feliz et al and hitting them in the middle of the order and expecting to do better. Please – more!
But in the process, don’t run right past the truth that because a stat is team-oriented, it somehow means that it also cannot be attributed to the individual pitcher or the clutch hitter.
Every time I think of this issue I remember Carlton’s 27 wins with the then woeful philles – maybe carlton would have won more than 27 with some other team but the fact that he did so with a team as bad as those phillies is remarkable even if it is an outlier.
@blackandwhite
I understand your point but what Joe is saying is that pedro feliz has been worse than a replacement player for years. Meaning that most anyone in their organization could provide more value (and more cheaply to boot).
You don’t really know the Astros organization.
The Feliz signing isn’t a bad one. He’s just a stop gap anyway. The way the Astros are trying to justify is silly, but that’s a separate issue.
Hi Joe:
First time/long time — First time commenter, long time reader.
A cool data point for you. In 2009, how many players had 80+ RBI and a .333 or lower OBP? Sixteen, and it’s a motley crew. http://bit.ly/80333s09
How many of them had 100+ RBI? One.
Expand that to 2006-09 (the “post steroid era,” if you will) and there are 51 qualifiers, of which two (!) crack 100.
During that four-year period, 128 players had 100+ RBI. And in 2009, 28 did.
My point:
If you believe in the church of RBI, fine; you are welcome to be foolish. However, even acolytes of that religion should recognize that a terrible OBP precludes you from having an elite number of RBI.
Great post all around.
~
We attribute the victory won by the team to the individual pitcher — and then conclude, based essentially on that attribution, that the pitcher is the key to victory.
One can see a parallel with Saves. The Save statistic was created in some attempt to measure performance, but instead, managers began managing in order to pad their closer’s save stats. Entirely bizarre. It is as if after they came up with Yards-After-Catch (YAC) that a coach sat down and designed his passing game with short, moving routes, so as to maximize his receivers YAC, instead of simply designing an offense to move the ball most effectively.
~
The strange fetishization of RBIs can best be viewed when assessing, say, the 4 & 5 hitters in a lineup:
1st inning:
4 hitter up, man on 2nd & 3rd. Single, 2 runs score, 2 rbi.
5 hitter up, man on 1st. Single. 0 rbi.
3rd inning:
4th hitter up, man on 2nd & 3rd, one out. Fly out to deep centre – sac fly (no AB), 1 rbi.
5 hitter up, man on 3rd, 2 out. Fly out to deep centre – 0 rbi.
5th inning:
4 hitter up, bases loaded. 2B, 3 rbi.
5 hitter up, man on 2nd. HR, 2 rbi.
7th inning:
4 hitter up, man on 3rd. G4, 1 rbi.
5 hitter up, 0 on. Single, 0 rbi.
4 hitter’s game stats: 2/3 (but made 2 outs) with 3 total bases and 7 RBIs.
5 hitter’s game stats: 3/4 with 6 total bases and 2 RBIs.
The 5 hitter either did exactly the same or better than what the 4 hitter did immediately before him in every plate appearance, ending the game with twice as many total bases and making 1 fewer (real) outs. But the 4 hitter will be the star of the game with 7 (vs. 2) RBIs.
The point about the leading rbi guy on a bad team is an important one.
Here in Toronto, where the city lives and dies with the (non)success of the Leafs, there was talk at the end of last season of getting rid of Jason Blake even though he led the team in goals. I hold no brief for the Leaf GM (nor the Leafs, for that matter) Brian Burke, but he assessed the situation perfectly: “No matter how bad a team is, they will *always* have someone who leads the team in scoring – it just doesn’t mean they were any good”.
Do we have to bring up Craig Paquette and his historic level of suck? I thought I would never have to think about him again! Once, I think I saw him leave 10 runners on base in one game-rally killing inning ending outs.
I had to listen to Bob Boone sing his praises while he made 564 outs in 729 plate appearances(counting GIDP and base running)
I am still convinced that Craig owns incriminating pictures of Bob Boone.
[...] Joe Posnanski knows one of the reasons the Giants have gone so long without a title: …. Houston’s new third [...]
I like to think that the Astros front office’s main motivation for signing Feliz was defense. The Astros are making a concerted effort to shore up the defense on the left side of the infield, which was the primary weakness of a bad defensive team last year. That’s one of the reasons that Tejada isn’t on the team, replaced by a defense-first rookie shortstop. Feliz is no worse offensively than last year’s third baseman, Geoff Blum–who would have been this year’s third baseman if Feliz hadn’t been signed.
However, I think that the Astros’ front office has always put too much emphasis on RISP stats. (I don’t think they are alone among teams which do that, by the way.) They look at Feliz’s season last year, and they see “a clutch hitter.” In 2008, Ty Wigginton had a great offensive season at 3d base, but the Astros front office talked about his poor batting average with RISP, and non-tendered him.
Why are people circling other people? What is the infatuation? So gay.
Thircle me, Thorro.
Feliz was a good fit for the Phillies — they just needed someone to play solid defense at 3B, bat 7th or 8th, and pop the occasional big hit.
Feliz is not the a good fit for a team that will bat him 5th or 6th and expect him to be a key part of their offense.
While I agree with many of the points here, I would point out that Feliz is not below replacement level when his defense is factored in. He was 1.3 to 1.4 WAR with the Phillies over the last two years.
Also, Feliz is not likely to be the No. 5 hitter for the Astros. The Astros have a new manager who has yet to finalize his lineup notions. But it looks like Berkman, Lee, and Pence will be the 3-4-5 hitters. It is likely that Feliz will hit either 6th or 7th. He could end up hitting
Sorry, I accidently hit the enter button, above. That last sentence should read “He could end up hitting 7th if Jason Castro or J.R. Towles come on strong enough offensively to bat higher.”
Circle me, Rick Ankiel, Jason Kendall, Yuni, Mike Jacobs.
Ed Wade isn’t a bad big league GM … he’s an atrocious GM.
Couldn’t you make the argument that the RBI guy has more value in that producing the last offensive event he is under more pressure to perform? This is the case made for closers having ‘high leverage’ innings that get more credit than starting pitchers. Not saying I agree but it is sentiment I see expressed even in Sabremetric circles.
Okay. Great article Joe and I’m nodding yes all the way through, then still nodding as I read the comments. Even though I love baseball in general, I am really passionate about my Bosox and thinking King James’ golden whisperings to The Chosen Sox must have caused this Lowell and Beltre switch, then I come upon Jim in DE’s comments that echo my thoughts and hopes. Unfortunately, I rush over to baseball reference and find both players have played 12 seasons. Beltre’s career OB% is .325 and OPS+ is 105, while Lowell’s is .343 and 109. Other than 5 years younger, we’re not better offense-wise!! If Lowell never comes back physically in any way, then we are better defensively, but Mike was a pretty good defensive player before the hip thing. Yet the crux of Joe’s article is OPS > Dingers coupled with low OB. What am I missing? Or will the Rays and Stankees be the only AL East teams at the end of the season dance? I’ve gone from the valley to mountain and back…thanks Joe, I think.
David #32…
you’re right, there is a clutchiness to being an RBI guy.
kevin: Prove it.
[...] Pedro Feliz, Houston [...]
Great post as always Joe
This got me thinking about Adam Dunn. Lifetime BA: .249
Lifetime OBP: .383
This blog does an excellent job celebrating Dunn’s skills, and I’m not trying to cut him down or devalue his walks.
But…
That batting avg is really low. On another team, in which the lineup had better hitters, Dunn’s walks would be much more valuable than they are with the Nats. For the Nationals, he has Josh Willingham hitting behind him. Willingham is not bad, but his lifetime BA is .264. Odds are that Dunn is not going to score often when he walks, and odds are that he will not drive in many runs when he walks either.
His walks are valuable inasmuch as they keep the inning alive, but they are useless if the inning ends and he is still on first base. This happens frequently in Washington because it has such a weak lineup.
I would love to see how many more runs the Nats would score if he boosted his BA by 20 points and dropped some of his walks. In Dunn’s case, he is pretty much the only guy in the lineup that is expected to drive in runs. If he makes contact, odds are good that a run or two will score, but if he walks, he probably will not drive in a run, and Josh Willingham will probably not drive him in either, and the inning ends with Dunn standing on first base and no runs being scored. I think he may be overvalued for his OBP because so much of it is based on walks, and his job is RBIs. Someone like Kevin Youkilis with the same OBP, half the homeruns, and a .310 BA would probably drive in more runs and score more runs than Dunn does in the Nats lineup. I haven’t run these numbers but I would bet on it.
Again, I am well aware that walks are good, and that Adam Dunn is good, but I think Adam Dunn’s skills are less effective in the Nats lineup than elsewhere.
The Nats are looking at his big RBI numbers and high OBP and they think they are getting more than they actually are in terms of runs created. They need to get another good hitter to maximize Dunn’s value, or trade Dunn for a different kind of hitter.
If people really want a cool review of ‘clutchiness’, you should listen to RadioLab from NPR–they did an episode a few months ago called Stochasticity about randomness and whether or not the ‘hot-hand’ exists in sports. They did another episode afterward called Are We Coins that seemed to contradict some of their findings, but it’s a really cool listen nonetheless. It’s on Itunes for free, check it out
This was an awesome read. I’m really enjoying this series, looking forward to reading more of these player articles.
Circle me Joe Carter isn’t close to being a Hall of Famer, but people want to point to his RBI streak.
[...] Joe Posnanski » Blog Archive » Pedro Feliz, Houston [...]
kevin: Would you care to name a few high clutchiness guys? I just went through the AL for 2009 and compared the rate of driving in runs for the teams leaders and trailers in RBIs. The best team leader was 9% above league average at driving in runners on base. The best team trailer was 9% above league average at driving in runners on base.
Barack, thanks – I was thinking Dunn too. How often does the team that gets more runners on base win the game? Is it less frequently than the team that gets more hits?
In 2007 Andruw Jones rung up 94 RBI with an OBP of .311 and and OPS of .724. He did, however, look awfully good walking to the plate and back to the dugout.
So should we now credit offensive linemen with touchdowns scored?
Joe, this is a well-reasoned article but I think you avoided talking about the biggest problem with the RBI. Its name. RBI stands for Run Batted In. While I agree that particular stat is over-rated, it will continue to be a glamorous counting stat until MLB emphasizes a more modern statistical approach. However, MLB has always valued tradition, and eliminating the RBI as a valued stat is the equivalent of a sea-change.
The problem is the language, not the perception.
are the “circle mes” funny?
@Larry – I can’t speak to the rest of the “circle mes”, but mine was…give it a second read and come back here….
Ah, you’re back…still not impressed?
Well, I wrote it with the intention of impressing you, and failing that, I apologize.
Circle me apathy.
@14 gary:
Wow. Thank you for that link. I’m a Mets fan, so I never really thought much about Morgan Ensberg, but after 10 minutes reading the “about” section of his blog, I am now a huge fan of his. I couldn’t even believe that was him writing at first because he replies to almost every individual comment! That’s incredible. Plus, his responses are candid and very nice. Thanks again for the link!
Feliz is isn’t 70.9 batting runs below REPLACEMENT for his career, he’s 70.9 runs below AVERAGE. It doesn’t make much sense, using the most widely accepted version of the replacement-level, to say any one facet of a player’s game is “below replacement.” The replacement-level adjustment is made after all contributions have been factored in. Even if Feliz were average in every other facet of the game, he’d still probably be above replacement (his negative offensive contribution has never outweighed his positional & replacement-level adjustments).
I know it’s not obvious, but this article is about the Royals, just like every other Player of the Day is. If you read the Astros’ bloggers complain about Ed Wade, you keep running into people that write “well, at least he isn’t Dayton Moore.”
Peter Happy sucks.
@35 NBarnes: sarcasm.
@42 jwb: uh, again, sarcasm. You really did all of that? Why?
Just to stand up a little for RBIs, all those guys getting on base aren’t scoring much without someone driving them in. It is a team game, after all. If Tigers catcher Gerald Laird was able to get a hit in the 8th, 10th or 12th innings of the one-game playoff against the Twins, the Tigers would have moved on to play the Yankees and not the Twins. He came up with 2, 2 and 3 men on, respectively, in those innings. He made the 3rd out each time. It was nice for those other guys to get on base for him, because we all know OBP leads to run scoring. But in those instances it amounted to nothing since the guy up after them stopped going to the trouble of carrying a bat to the plate in mid-July since it served no purpose.
Worse, batting behind Laird (.225/.306/.320) was Adam Everett (.245/.297/.351). The Tigers should have put Curtis Granderson in front of these guys, because he was .249/.327/.453 with 30 HR. He had some speed, so if he did get on base he could steal 2nd putting him in position to score on the dribbler singles that Laird or Everett hit periodically. And he had power, so he could drive in the guys on base in front of him so they weren’t left out there for Laird and Everett to strand.
The leader of the Free World @ 37
I am not sure what your point is. If your point is that when we have two players, Player A and Player B and Player A hits .240/.380/.500 and Player B hits .310/.380/.500, then Player B is the better player, I don’t think that anyone would disagree. Hits, even singles, are better than walks.
That doesn’t mean that Player A is a bad player. Further, it seems to me that the Nats problem is not that it’s best offensive player hits for too low an average, but that the other players around him need to be upgraded. I certainly don’t think the Nats would be a better team if they replaced Dunn with a player that hit .280/.300/.450, for instance.
8: Somebody said at 10:56 am on March 13th, 2010:
“His glove is slick, his arm in incredible, and his nonchalance after making a slick play is outstanding.”
Pedro Feliz: Outstanding Nonchalance. All Star-level nonchalance, really.
But seriously, this comment interested me because it made me realize how much sabermetrics has changed the game – and I’m going to kind of side with the meathead Bill Simmons argument here – not always in a good way.
One of the joys of being a kid baseball fan was having your favorite players, who were often the best players but not always – sometimes they just had a certain style about them that jumped out at you and it made it pleasurable to watch them. JoePo has talked about his childhood regard for Duane Kuiper, for example, who was not a good player but was just a good guy to watch and root for, for some reason.
And that was fun, just liking a player because you liked watching him and he seemed to come through in big situations or you liked the way his swing looked or the way he wore his uniform or whatever.
Now, and here’s the meathead part, we’re not really allowed to just enjoy players anymore for having “outstanding nonchalance” after making a good play, because we now know that Pedro Feliz sucks.
Yeah, we’re smarter now, but you have to admit we’ve lost something.
@46: No. Don’t worry if you don’t find it humorous. It’s a bit sad, actually.
Joe – wonderful article. It is hard to believe the Astros spent that much on Feliz. I also don’t understand how an organization that deals in the millions can have idiots running them. I really don’t. There are so few teams and only one GM per team. How hard can it be to really find someone smart and talented enough to be GM?
I would bat Feliz 9th. His OBA will be better than the pitcher, so maybe there will be some increase in run productivity as the batting order turns over.
But I would bat Feliz 9th because every once in awhile his bat will run into a fastball. Give him is solo homers, and get them from the #9 slot. Of course, a replacement player would be better, but now that he’s signed the Astros are screwed.
Jose Lopez is also a perfect example of your point here. The Mariners know this. I think the other teams also know this because the M’s couldn’t unload him this offseason, although there were a lot of available 2b (like Felipe Lopez, Hudson, etc). I bet Zduriencik gave Wade a call anyway.
In a way, your post is about run scoring offensive plays. I don’t think Rickey Henderson really gets his due. I think he may have been one of the most valuable players ever to play the game. “Rickey runs. Rickey scores.”
You want to know the biggest problem with pitcher wins and losses? The name. If they weren’t called wins and losses, the people who still use them would have moved on from them a long time ago right along with the rest of us. But no, some genius created an arbitrary list of rules for pitchers and called the result “wins” and “losses” even though the rules really have nothing to do with whether or not a team wins or loses. If a Win was called by any other name, nobody would ever mention them. But since they were given a name that people associate with a team’s overall success, they’re still treated as something important.
So here’s what we need to do. We need to get the names changed. From now on, a Win will be called a Positive and a Loss will be called a Negative.
Hey did you see that CC Sabathia almost has 20 Positives?
Heck yes, this stat will be gone within 5 years. Make it happen, Joe.
a Yuni update (or some perspective on how it is he does what he does):
Same ‘ol Yuni
Wonder why shortstop Yuniesky Betancourt leveled off as a player and never improved? You, the Mariners and the Kansas City Royals.
One reason was apparent during the game Friday, when Betancourt sat with a few other players at the far end of the dugout during the game. Betancourt talked animatedly, laughed and appeared to be having a fine time – with his back to home plate the entire time he wasn’t in the on-deck circle.
Not once did he watch to see what the opposing pitcher might be throwing.
Read more: http://www.thenewstribune.com/2010/03/12/1107528/now-ms-figgins-has-a-batting-average.html#ixzz0iHDOYMok
Thinking about the sequence of events that leads to an RBI, it reminds me of something that bugs me. The glory that surrounds a walk-off run or a “game-winning” shot in basketball makes sense in terms of the excitement, but it seems so obvious that it’s not truly game-winning, any more than any other run or point. Particularly in basketball I find it amazing: we never talk about the fact that every missed shot is the game-losing one when there’s been a game-winner.
As a phillies fan, I will miss his glove and nothing else. He swung at the first pitch every time. EVERY TIME. 3 out of 4 at bats during an NLCS game last year. You would think werth would’ve rubbed off on him. There’s no way placido should bat 2nd, but at least he’ll take a pitch.
Thanks for writing this article about Pedro, Joe. Pedro was a slightly above replacement player because of his defense, but I had the hardest time convincing other sabr-phils fans how awful he was at the plate. I’d rather have had Adam Dunn manning third than Pedro. My comparison is this- Jimmy Rollins had an atrocious season last year, his BA/OBP/SLG was .250/.296/.423. Pedro had a normal Pedro year, his slash was .266/.308/.386. Jimmy had 77 RBI and Pedro 82. Broadcasters and others are citing that Rollins still had a ‘good’ season because he scored 100 runs. Hey, if you flip Pedro and Jimmy in the batting order Jimmy probably has 100 RBI instead of 100 R because instead of hitting behind Pedro and the pitcher, he’s hitting behind Victorino, Werth, Ibanez, etc. I think Pedro’s a good guy, and his glove is awesome to watch but I’m not sad to see him go.
This reminds me of those great SNL skits that parodied the 1992 presidential debates. Ross Perot (while addressing Bush Sr.) said something to the effect of “I can stick a monkey in the White House and get two percent growth”.
Here we would have “I could stick a monkey in the five hole with an 85 OPS+ and rack up 80 RBI’s”.
(As an aside, the comment Perot made to Clinton in that skit was brilliant as well. Clinton was touting the large year-over-year percentage growth for some economic indicator while he was governor in Arkansas. Perot’s reply (paraphrased), “If I take one penny and add another penny, that’s 100% growth. Bottom line, I’ve got two cents.” Just classic. How awesome were Carvey and Hartman in their primes?)
C’mon, let’s give Pedro Feliz some credit. Take a look at his numbers with men on 2nd and 3rd:
.366/.462/.648
And with the bases loaded:
.319/.322/.526
And finally man on 3rd, less than 2 outs:
.365/.377/.527
The guy raked when the ducks were on the pond. Raked, I say!
Just to clarify a point from post #63. Those numbers aren’t 2009 numbers. Those are career numbers for Feliz. The guy has played 10 seasons, has over 4100 plate appearances, and still put up those numbers in those situations.
I think it’s assumed here that Feliz did little or nothing good but still got 80+ RBIs because, after all, if you get enough guys on base someone will drive them in. The numbers in post #63 suggest Feliz had more to do with getting those RBIs than just being in the right place at the right time.
What are the league average numbers in those situations? I’d be interested to see. Where did you find them?
I found the numbers on baseball-reference.com. Just click on splits, you can go per season or for career. I don’t know what the average numbers in those situations are. I know RBI totals are generally high in those situations, though.
[...] is to bet the free, odd or behind the Rank Organisation bets. It doesn't matter how much revenue is generated voluntarily, it just isn't what the Rank Organisation should be getting involved with.The deal is [...]
[...] JoPoz on RBI’s [...]
I decided to grab the splits of some of the other guys on the Phillies for their career.
Raul Ibanez:
-23
.337 .531 .554
123
.371 .385 .621
–3, less 2 out
.382 .420 .629
Shane Victorino
-23
.347 .433 .510
123
.348 .423 .500
–3, less 2 out
.364 .381 .566
Jimmy Rollins
-23
.306 .442 .587
123
.229 .285 .385
–3, less 2 out
.387 .376 .637
Chase Utley
-23
.291 .386 .456
123
.333 .344 .580
–3, Less 2 out
.344 .366 .569
So 4 guys from the same lineup. Going by OPS+ for career, Jimmy and Shane are almost exactly league average. Raul is about in the 1st standard deviation above average, and Chase in the 2nd. Except for Jimmy’s weird power outage with the bases loaded (where he still slugs better than Pedro) they all compare favorably or better to him. League average in those situations is better than league average with no one on.
Forget the comment about Rollins. I posted the right numbers but was reading the wrong column when I wrote it. I saw .585 SLG instead of the correct .385.
You have to watch Pedro play everyday to appreciate both his good defense and his bad offense. He had a different first name when he played for the Giants. He was known as “Damn it Pedro!” Having a low OBP guy in the middle of the lineup just kills you. SF has had their share. With Benji Molina and his sub .290 OBP hitting cleanup they are just a horrible offensive team. Benji had the 2nd lowest OBP in the league last year. So the Giants had one of the top outmakers in the league hitting cleanup. He catches a top staff and is a good clubhouse guy, but he has to hit 7th in my lineup, I don’t care how much power he has.