NLCS Preview: Should the Philadelphia Phillies Fear the San Francisco Giants?
After dismissing the Cincinnati Reds in the NLDS, the Phillies will face off against the San Francisco Giants in the NLCS.
Will the Giants be a minor speed bump on the road to another National League pennant, or do they have a legitimate shot at sending the Phillies home early?
Here are some arguments for both cases:
Fear the Giants
In theory, the teams in the NLCS are the two best the league has to offer. Not only does a team have to survive the regular-season gauntlet to earn a playoff berth, but they must also defeat another playoff worthy team just to advance.
The Giants won a competitive NL West division, and then dismissed the Atlanta Braves in the NLDS. That alone marks them as a good team. And the main reason for their success is their pitching staff.
The staff is led by Tim Lincecum, who is one of the best starters in the majors, having won the 2008 and 2009 Cy Young Awards. By his standards, 2010 was a slightly off year, as he struggled in August leading to some “What’s wrong with Lincecum? Is he injured?” talk.
He quickly dismissed that speculation with an outstanding stretch run, and a sterling effort in his start in the NLDS. If he is on his game, he can be near unhittable.
The rest of the staff is impressive as well: Jonathan Sanchez is a tough left-hander, who has given the Phillies trouble in the past. Matt Cain had an excellent year and features a good fastball. It isn’t clear if the Giants will use a fourth starter, but if they do, it will be rookie left-hander Madison Bumgarner. (Now that’s a great name!) Bumgarner had a strong rookie season and excelled in his NLDS start, so he is far from a weak link.
The Giants bullpen has also performed well this year, led by closer Brian Wilson, who led the NL in saves.
Considering that the Phillies had trouble scoring runs (or at least earned runs) off of the Reds’ good but not great pitchers, what kind of success can they expect to have against the Giants pitchers? They can’t depend on a complete breakdown by the Giants’ fielders similar to what happened to the Reds.
The long layoff between playoff series isn’t going to help the Phillies’ chances either. Ryan Howard (one of the few Phillies who has had past success against Lincecum) didn’t have a strong NLDS, and tends to suffer after extended time off. They’ll need him to start hitting like he did in last year’s NLCS in which he was named MVP. The extra rest probably won’t help guys like Jimmy Rollins, Jayson Werth and Raul Ibanez find their stroke either.
There’s a good chance that these games are going to be low-scoring affairs. Games will likely come down to one or two plays, and in that type of situation, one fluke play can make a huge difference. The Phillies are the better team on paper, but in close games, that doesn’t mean anything.
Start Planning for the World Series
While the Giants’ spot in the final four may prove that they are a good team, it doesn’t necessarily mean that they are a great team. They won a West division in which their two closest competitors (Padres and Rockies) both collapsed badly down the stretch. In the NLDS, they were matched against a beaten up Braves team that seemed to find ways to lose.
So while it is nice that they have gotten this far, at some point they’ll have to prove themselves to be more than just opportunistic.
They’ll also have to find a way to hit better than they have. If the Reds—the highest scoring team in the NL—couldn’t hit against the Phillies’ starters, what chance do the weak-hitting Giants have?
While the Giants were the only team in the majors to have beaten the Phillies starting trio of Roy Halladay, Roy Oswalt and Cole Hamels this season, there’s no indication that they’ll be able to do so again. Even they don’t seem to like their chances, as I’ve heard quotes from Giants players about “needing to scrape out some runs,” and “wanting to keep things low scoring.”
If we give the Giants the edge in the potential Game 4 matchup of Fat Joe Blanton vs. Bumgarner (By the way, people need to give Blanton more credit. He didn’t have the the greatest year, but he was solid down the stretch, and has had postseason success in the past), will the Giants be able to score enough runs in three out of six starts by Halladay, Oswalt and Hamels?
I can’t see the Giants scoring enough runs to win the series. Who in the Giants lineup seems like a real threat? Buster Posey had a great rookie season, but is he capable of carrying their entire offense? Aubrey Huff and Andres Torres are solid hitters, but once again, not exactly the type to make a pitcher worry too much.
Former Phillie Pat Burrell has played well for them, and could provide some power, but as any Phillies fan can tell you, Burrell can be pitched to.
Maybe in a close game the Giants will be able to score some runs against the Phillies relievers. But the way that the Phillies starters have pitched, their relief pitching doesn’t often even come into play. And unlike the Braves, the Phillies late-game relief combo of Ryan Madson (MADSON!!!!) and Brad Lidge are healthy, and have been extremely effective in the second half of the season.
The Giants are also far weaker than the Phillies defensively. Sure, their numbers might look OK because they don’t commit a lot of errors. But that is partially due to the horrendous fielding range showed by many of their fielders. Are the Giants capable of making the game saving defensive plays that would be necessary to win a close game? It seems doubtful.
As for the Phillies hitters, I think they’ll do just enough damage to get the job done. Unlike most lineups that the Giants face, the Phillies have strength all the way through. Which means that even if Rollins and Howard are slumping, Chase Utley and Jayson Werth are capable of carrying the team. And while the layoff might hurt the Phillies’ hitting timing, it can only help with Rollins’ sore hamstring. If he can run at near full speed, that adds yet another element that the Giants will have to deal with.
My Prediction
The Giants seem like a tougher opponent than the Dodgers of 2008 and 2009. And I don’t think that the Giants will play scared like the Reds seemed to.
But in the end, the result will be the same. The Giants’ starters are too good for them not to win a couple games, but in the end, the Phillies will capture their third consecutive pennant.
Phillies in six.
Originally published on my blog: Stranger in a Strange Land
Read more Philadelphia Phillies news on BleacherReport.com
Philadelphia’s Young Ace Re-emerges: In (Non-Statistical) Praise of Cole Hamels
On Monday night, Cole Hamels delivered the latest in a string of marvelous pitching performances and led the Phillies to a victory over the Atlanta Braves. Brilliant performances by Hamels have not been rare throughout his career, and yet less than a year ago, many Phillies fans were ready to send him out of town.
A brief history lesson:
Hamels was the leader of the Phillies pitching staff in 2008 and helped carry the team to a World Series championship. He looked like an emerging young ace, and everyone expected huge things from him in 2009.
2009 didn’t go quite as planned. Possibly more than any other Phillie, Hamels felt the negative effects of a long postseason run. His innings pitched had jumped considerably in 2008, and he decided that his arm needed extra time to recover. Because of this (and perhaps partially because he was distracted by his new found celebrity) he delayed the start of his offseason training program.
Hamels felt he would be able to compensate during Spring Training, but due to some arm soreness (which may have been a result of the lack of training), he wasn’t able to fully catch up. Needing extra time to prepare for the season, he missed the first few games. When he finally debuted, his arm strength wasn’t nearly where it had been, as he was only throwing in the high 80s as opposed to the low-to-mid 90s that had been his career norm.
While he did show flashes of greatness throughout 2009, he couldn’t consistently recapture his strong 2008 form. Even worse, he appeared to lose some of his mental edge. In the 2008 postseason, many lauded him for being “fearless” and “unflappable” on the mound. But in 2009, there seemed to be several occasions where bad calls or fielding errors noticeably affected him, and he appeared to lose his composure.
Tellingly, after a poor World Series start, he told reporters that he couldn’t wait for the season to be over. While he meant that he simply wanted a fresh start after an uneven season, many fans took the quote to mean that he was giving up on 2009.
By most people’s estimation, 2009 was a disappointing season for Hamels who finished with a 10-11 record and a 4.32 ERA.
But there was one group who countered that Hamels’ actually performed as well in 2009 as he did in 2008: the sabermetricians (or statheads as some like to call them). They argued that the decrease in Hamels’ numbers was not due to poor performance, but rather due to bad luck and circumstances beyond his control.
Statheads discount many of baseball’s traditional statistics, most notably pitcher wins. They claim that wins are too dependent on outside factors. To some extent this is true, as a pitcher can receive little run support, or his bullpen could blow the lead, leaving him without a win even though he pitched well.
When judging pitcher peformance, statheads often refer to statistics that can supposedly measure how lucky a pitcher was. Some examples are batting average on balls in play (BABIP) or home runs per fly ball (HR/FB). Supposedly, the pitcher has little control over these, and over time, they will typically revert to the league average. So if a pitcher has a poor record, and either of these values deviate too much from the mean (as both did for Hamels), it just means that the pitcher was unlucky, not that he pitched poorly.
I can understand the statheads’ belief that statistics can provide a deeper understanding of the game and player value. But what statheads don’t seem to always comprehend is that using statistics without any context to go along with them can be equally misleading.
Take a look at these two hypothetical scenarios:
Scenario 1: In the second inning of a 0-0 game, the home team’s pitcher gives up a solo home run.
Scenario 2: In the eighth inning of a 2-2 game – immediately after his team has scored two runs to tie the game in the previous half inning – the home team’s pitcher gives up a solo home run.
Statistically, both cases are the same, as only one run has been given up, and the team is facing a one run deficit. But in reality, which case is worse? I think most baseball fans would tell you that the second case is much worse.
A solo homer in the second inning doesn’t seem especially harmful. While it isn’t great to be playing from behind, the team still has eight chances to make up the run.
In the second case, it is undoubtedly a bit deflating for the team knowing that the comeback they just staged was for naught. Even worse, they will now only have two chances to erase the deficit.
What does this tell us? That sometimes whether or not a pitcher wins the game can depend on factors beyond what the stat sheet indicates.
There seem to be quite a few pitchers who pitch just well enough to lose. Their stat lines might look good, but they don’t do the things necessary to win games, or they give up runs like in the second scenario, and as a result, the team loses.
There’s something to be said for pitchers who know how to win games. Pitchers who can do the little things like bunt runners over, field their position well, and hold base runners on give their teams a better chance to win games. Winning pitchers also seem to be able to deliver big pitches in key situations.
For instance, why does Roy Halladay win so many games? First, he almost always pitches deep into the game. The longer a starter goes, the less of a chance his bullpen has to blow the game. If a pitcher pitches a strong game, but can’t get out of the seventh inning, he has less room to complain about a blown lead.
Halladay also seems to have the ability to bear down in big spots. I can recall multiple occassions when he was in a jam, and induced a double play to escape. Was the double play a result of luck, or because Halladay delivered a pitch resulting in a ground ball? I tend to lean towards the latter.
What does this have to do with Hamels? At times in 2009, Hamels looked like a pitcher who didn’t do all the things necessary to win games. He seemed to lack mental toughness. If a call went against him, or things started to go poorly for the team, he didn’t seem to lack the ability to bear down and set things right.
It wasn’t bad luck that caused him to fall apart in his World Series start against the Yankees. After Alex Rodriguez gave up a cheap home run, Hamels could have recovered. Instead, he gave up three more runs, one of which was scored via a base hit by the opposing pitcher. Did bad luck cause him to give up the hit, or was it due to him overusing his curveball, which he considers to be his third best pitch?
That World Series outing summed up Hamels’ 2009 season. He seemed prone to giving up home runs at important moments, and giving up hits to players who shouldn’t have been able to touch him. Was he unlucky? Yes, I think he was somewhat. But was that the main difference between 2008 and 2009? I don’t believe so. I think it had much more to due with not being able to strike out hitters consistently, and not delivering big pitches in key situations.
Regardless of the cause for his 2009 downturn, as we approach the end of the 2010 season, Hamels once again is pitching like a dominant ace. What changed?
Part of the reason for improvement is the Phillies’ additions of fellow starters Roy Oswalt and Halladay. Both of those pitchers have pitched like aces, and that puts less pressure on Hamels. When a team only has one ace, there is often tremendous pressure on him to win. He knows that if he doesn’t, the team is faced with the prospect of a losing streak.
But when you have multiple aces like the Phillies do, there is less pressure on each of them. They may also start to feed off of each other, trying to top what the others have done. This certainly seems to be the case with the Phillies’ trio.
Even without the addition of the two Roys, I’d say that Hamels would have improved simply because his arm strength appears to be back. His fastball is once again reaching the mid-90s, and that makes his changeup more of a weapon. If hitters aren’t worried about catching up to a fastball, then the changeup won’t be able to fool them enough to be effective. That might have been the difference between getting a strikeout and batters fouling off pitches as they were too often doing in 2009.
Hamels also made a point to expand his pitching repertiore. Up until 2010, his main pitches had been the fastball and changeup. He occassionally threw a curveball, but it was generally ineffecitve (as shown in the World Series). His coaches advised him that he would need another pitch to keep hitters offguard. With no significant breaking pitch to worry about, hitters – especially lefthanders – seemed more able to lock onto this pitches.
Hamels worked to improve his curveball to help neutralize lefties, and in addition he worked to develop a cut fastball to use against righties. (Side note: I always get a kick when announcers refer to the cut fastball as a cutter. “These hitters are no match for the cutter!”) In theory, these pitches would make hitters far less comfortable sitting in and waiting for a fastball or changeup.
Early returns were not especially promising, as in the early months of the season, Hamels didn’t seem to have great control of his secondary pitches. The curveball and cutter were either getting hit, or else he would mount deep pitch counts because he was wild.
To his credit, Hamels stuck with the new pitches. He could have said, “Forget this. I was World Series MVP with only two pitches. The new stuff isn’t working, so I’ll just go with those two.” But instead, he worked through the problems, and now seems to be a much more complete pitcher. He appears to be even better than he was in 2008.
Ironically, throughout most of the season, his win-loss record didn’t necessarily reflect his improvement. He was receiving pathetically little run support and even lost multiple games by a 1-0 score.
Now this may seem strange, since I just warned against discounting wins due to “bad luck.” But here’s the thing about luck for a pitcher: If he is truly pitching well, it will eventually balance out. Lately, the Phillies have been giving Hamels adequate run support, and as a result, he has started winning games again.
So I will offer praise to Cole Hamels. He may have had a poor (and maybe somewhat unlucky) 2009, but he worked to improve himself, and the Phillies are now reaping the rewards.
Originally posted on my blog: Stranger in a Strange Land
Read more Philadelphia Phillies news on BleacherReport.com
Philadelphia Phillies: Entering the Stretch Run, No More Excuses
I am happy to say that I may have been wrong in writing off the Phillies.
Since I wrote that, the Phillies play improved greatly, and they fought their way back into contention. As September begins, they find themselves leading the wild card standings and trailing the Braves in the National League East by three games. With six games yet to play against the Braves, it is clear that the Phillies control their own playoff destiny.
Of course, just because they’re in a position to make the postseason, it doesn’t mean that they actually will. So how do the Phillies’ chances look heading into this stretch run?
Right now, the team’s biggest strength is their starting pitching. The rotation, bolstered by the addition of Roy Oswalt, has been performing very well. Oswalt, Roy Halladay, and Cole Hamels give the team an edge in just about every game they start. Joe Blanton has improved over the past month, and seems a good bet to at least keep the team in the game when he pitches. While fifth starter Kyle Kendrick has been much less reliable, he’s also pitched well enough at times to keep his starts from being automatic losses.
The bullpen seems to have stabilized somewhat recently. While he hasn’t been at the elite level of 2008, closer Brad Lidge has at least not been the disaster that he was in 2009 either. He seems to be an average major league closer at this point. He’ll get the job done the majority of the time, but he’ll blow a few saves along the way.
RYAN MADSON!!! has once again been excellent in his eighth inning setup role. The other relievers are less reliable, but considering how well the starters have done, there hasn’t been much need for them to pitch too much. They should be able to piece together enough successful innings from JC Romero, Chad Durbin, and Jose Contreras to get the job done.
Basically, the Phillies can count on their pitching giving them at least a chance to win on most nights. Which means that it is up to the offense to do it’s fair share.
The lineup has underachieved throughout the season. The Phillies have been one of the best offensive teams in baseball over the past few years, and most expected them to be a high scoring team again. Instead, they have struggled mightily, going through long stretches where they have had trouble scoring runs. They’ve been shut out 11 times so far, and on three different occasions, they’ve finished the game with only one hit.
Part of the problem has been injuries. Just about every regular player has spent time on the disabled list, and they’ve only had their expected lineup together for a handful of games. But as of September 1st, all of their regulars are back in the lineup.
Despite having a full roster, it might be a stretch to declare the team healthy as a few of their players don’t appear to be at full strength. Placido Polanco has admittedly suffered elbow pain for most of the season, and it might be wearing on him a bit.
Something definitely seems to be wrong with Chase Utley. There was hope that the time he spent on the DL might actually help him, since he tends to wear down as the season progresses. But his hitting stroke doesn’t seem to be there. He seems to be hitting a lot of pop ups to the left side of the field, something that I don’t recall him ever doing much of before.
And Ryan Howard looks completely lost at the plate right now. Considering he’s typically a slow starter, it was to be expected that he might need some time to round back into shape after his stint on the DL. Still, he has looked unable to hit major league pitching since his return. Perhaps his home run on Tuesday night is a sign that he’s getting back on track. Since he’s carried the Phillies’ offense in September of recent years, they’ll need him to start hitting again quickly.
But despite their possible ailments, if these guys are playing, then they should be expected to perform at their usual high level. If they aren’t healthy enough to play well, then they shouldn’t be in the lineup.
The bottom line is that while injuries might have kept the Phillies from dominating up until this point, that is no longer a valid excuse. As manager Charlie Manuel recently said, “The lineup we have on the field tonight, that’s our lineup. If that lineup doesn’t hit, we’re in trouble.”
A postseason berth is waiting for the Phillies. If they can’t take it, they have no one to blame but themselves.
Originally posted in my blog: Stranger in a Strange Land
Read more Philadelphia Phillies news on BleacherReport.com
Raising the White Flag: Writing Off the 2010 Philadelphia Phillies
I’m done. I am officially giving up on the 2010 Philadelphia Phillies.
While I have similarly written the team off in recent years and then watched the Phillies rally towards the end of the season, I just can’t see it happening this year.
Yesterday, they narrowly avoided being swept by the St. Louis Cardinals. And by narrowly, I mean it required their pitching staff to throw a one-hit shutout.
Despite that, Philadelphia still needed to go 11 innings just to score a run. This was only its second victory since the All-Star break, and the team’s first win was practically handed to them by the Cubs.
Despite yesterday’s win, the Phillies are still seven games behind the Braves in the National League East, and show little indication that they are capable of making up such a deficit.
Before the season, many people—myself included —speculated that this could potentially be the greatest Phillies team ever.
And for the first month and a half of the season, they certainly looked capable of living up to the hype. They were cruising along at 24-13 with a comfortable division lead.
But then things went inexplicably wrong.
It’s hard to pinpoint the exact moment when the problems began, but it might have started on May 18th. After crushing the lowly Pittsburgh Pirates the night before, they would be facing them again with ace pitcher Roy Halladay on the mound.
It felt like a guaranteed win for the Phillies—a game that they could pretty much win without even trying. And although Halladay pitched well in that game, the Phillies were held to only one run and lost the game 2-1.
While the mindset of the players is obviously quite different than the mindset of the fans, it is worth wondering if the team also became somewhat overconfident that night. Did their early season success—coming after two straight pennants—somehow lead them to believe that they could win without even trying? Was their competitive nature dulled?
The turning point also might have come that Friday when they began Interlegaue play against the Red Sox. They were cruising towards victory when, for the second time this season, Jimmy Rollins had to leave a game with a calf injury.
Rollins had missed much of the season to that point, and throughout his absence his replacements had played surprisingly well. But it might have been too much to ask for them to do it for an extended period of time. Not only does Rollins typically spark the Phillies offense from the leadoff spot, but he is an excellent defensive player and one of the team’s leaders.
Rollins’ injury also might have hurt the Phillies’ psyches. They had already suffered some bad injury luck with disabled list stints by pitchers J.A. Happ, Brad Lidge, and Ryan Madson. When Rollins went out again, it would have only been natural for the Phillies to start to wonder if they were somewhat snakebitten.
For instance, not long after Rollins returned (and the team looked like it was on an upswing), Chase Utley went out with a thumb injury that will keep him out until August at the earliest. When you can’t get your expected lineup on the field, the pressure starts to mount for the remaining players.
Regardless of the cause, the Phillies entered a funk that they have yet to emerge from. Considering the track record of their hitters, there is no real explanation for the lack of offensive success. While they have been shut down by some star pitchers like Josh Johnson and Chris Carpenter, they have also had troubles against mediocre-to-poor guys like Zach Duke and Ross Ohlendorf.
The injuries might have contributed to the slump, but injuries alone can’t account for their futility. For instance, before he got hurt, Utley was having the worst season of his career.
Jayson Werth got off to a strong start, but has been slumping badly since then. Shane Victorino has hit for more power this year, but his overall numbers have slipped. And Raul Ibanez has continued to scuffle as he did the second half of last year.
In comparison, the pitchers have fared better, but they have been somewhat disappointing as well. While Halladay has mostly pitched well, he hasn’t quite lived up to the “Best Pitcher in Baseball” hype he received before the season. To his credit, he’s received very little run support, and has been on the losing end of several low scoring games.
The rotation’s back end, consisting of Joe Blanton, Jamie Moyer (who has now come down with an injury of his own), and Kyle Kendrick, has been terribly inconsistent. They have all provided some strong starts, but have also been atrocious in other games. There is no telling what to expect from any of them.
Then again, aside from Halladay and Cole Hamels, none of the Phillies’ starters was expected to be the type of pitcher who could carry a team to victory. They were expected to keep the game close with a “quality start” and have the offense put up a lot of runs. Since their offense has been so underwhelming, it has made their performances look that much worse.
Their bullpen doesn’t seem to be in great shape either. While closer Brad Lidge has been better than the utter disaster he was in 2009, he has had some shaky outings and has made the ninth inning a nervous experience for Phillies fans. It doesn’t appear that any of their other relief pitchers are especially reliable either.
While it’s bad enough to watch a team underachieve, the worst part about the team is how they seem to play bad baseball. Their offensive slump seems more pronounced by the accompanying mistakes that they make.
Between fielding errors, poor baserunning, and abysmal clutch hitting, the Phillies are not doing the little things necessary to win games.
Many of these mistakes are hard to explain. For the past few seasons, they’ve been one of the better defensive teams in the league. While part of the problem may be that some of their regulars have missed time, it feels like even their normally sure-handed players are making atypical errors in the field.
Their running game has taken a major downturn as well. They have been among the league leaders in stolen bases the past few years, and those numbers have been way down in 2010.
Once again, injuries to Rollins and Utley have not helped in this department, but it still seems as if they aren’t taking advantage of their opportunities. In addition, they’ve made several baserunning mistakes, and have made outs trying to stretch hits for extra bases.
Worst of all is the team’s situational hitting. While it had some problems with this in recent years (the 2008 World Series championship team had notable struggles with runners in scoring position), it seems to be even more pronounced since the offensive slump began.
The Phillies into double plays. They seem incapable of advancing runners. And in situations where they have a runner on third base and less than two outs, their success rate at getting the runner home is horrendous.
It’s maddening to watch a once mighty offense struggle so much. You can only see Raul Ibanez flail helplessly at a curveball or watch Jayson Werth take strike three so many times before you get disgusted.
Their offense has performed so poorly that the team fired hitting coach Milt Thompson. Thompson was their hitting coach since 2005 and during his time, they had constantly been among the best offensive teams in baseball.
Was it his fault? Probably not, but I guess they figured they had to make some sort of move.
Now, their front office is talking about looking for help by making a trade for a starting pitcher such as Roy Oswalt.
Of course, had they simply not traded ace pitcher Cliff Lee in the offseason, they probably wouldn’t need to look for help. Management has still not been able to adequately explain why they “had” to trade Lee, and why they got such a poor return for him.
But even with Lee, I don’t know if the team would have fared much better this season, since it’s difficult to win games where you don’t receive any run support. In many of their starts, Halladay and Hamels have pitched well, only to get a loss because the team was held to one or fewer runs.
The team’s only hope is that since their hitters have successful track records will start to play up to their capabilities. There’s a theory that guys like Ibanez, Victorino, and (when he returns) Utley will ultimately have final numbers similar to their career norms. Getting to those numbers would mean an especially hot final two and a half months to the season, which would probably result in an offensive explosion for the team.
But based on the way that this season has gone, I no longer expect to see a season ending hot streak like we saw in 2007 and 2008. After a few years of everything breaking right for them, it just feels like a lot is going wrong.
It also seems like the other teams in the division are playing better than they did the past few years. To make up ground in the division, they’ll need the Braves to slump a bit, but it would be hard to imagine that the Braves collapse down the stretch like the Mets did in 2007.
I could be wrong. Philadelphia could suddenly remember how to hit, go on a hot streak and make yet another late-season run at the playoffs.
I will continue to watch the team and hope that they turn things around. But after seeing too many inept offensive performances, and too many mistake-filled losses, I no longer expect it to happen.
Originally posted on my blog: Stranger in a Strange Land
Read more Philadelphia Phillies news on BleacherReport.com
Ryan Howard vs. the Statheads: Why Phillies’ Contract Extension Is a Good Move
Earlier this week, the Phillies gave first baseman Ryan Howard a contract extension through the year 2016.
This contract makes him the second highest-paid player in baseball and seems to ensure that he will be a member of the Philadelphia Phillies for the foreseeable future.
They locked up one of the franchise’s greatest players for years to come. This should be a good thing, right?
Not if you believe the statheads.
Who are the statheads? The statheads (or sabermetric experts, as they’d prefer to be called) rose to prominence in the early 2000s with the book Moneyball by Michael Lewis.
Moneyball showed how the Oakland A’s realized that they couldn’t compete financially with the larger market teams such as the New York Yankees and Boston Red Sox. If they wanted to remain competitive, they would have to find some sort of advantage.
The advantage they found was sabermetrics. By taking a deeper statistical analysis of the game, they found certain statistics—such as on-base percentage and defensive ratings—that helped teams win but, more importantly, weren’t overpriced like traditional stats like home runs and batting average.
Thanks to the publicity of Moneyball —and more importantly, because the A’s were successful with their approach—sabermetrics went from the fringe of baseball analysis to the forefront. Suddenly, we were bombarded with a wave of new statistics: OPS, WAR, UZR! The statheads claimed that these statistics were the real judges of how good a baseball player is.
What about the old statistics that everyone used to measure players by, such as wins and RBIs? According to the statheads, those statistics are too dependent on outside factors.
To an extent, I understand where they are coming from. I’ve seen lousy pitchers accumulate high win totals merely because they pitch for good offensive teams, and RBI are largely dependent on how many runners are on base when the batter comes to the plate.
On the other hand, sometimes players can’t be summed up just by advanced statistics.
That is where Ryan Howard comes in.
Statheads hate Ryan Howard. To them, Howard is the type of old-school player who was overvalued before the statistical revolution. According to prominent statheads like Keith Law of ESPN.com, Howard isn’t a great player. To them, he’s actually a liability.
Sure, he hits a lot of home runs (overrated) and has a lot of RBI (only because the Phillies lineup provides him with so many opportunities), but because he hits poorly against left-handers and strikes out too much, he is a detriment to the team.
Not unexpectedly, the statheads were apoplectic when the Phillies gave Howard a contract extension. Not only were the Phillies giving a huge contract to a player based on overrated statistics, but they were also giving a lot of money to a player whose performance would surely decline during the life of the contract.
Another big statheads trend is to compare players due to statistical similarity, and based on those comparisons, they make projections on the remainder of their careers. They figure that if players have had similar stats up until this point in their career, then it is logical that the rest of their careers will play out the same way as well.
While this seems like a reasonable idea, it’s unclear just how accurate these projections are. These projections ignore the fact that every player’s career path is different. Just because one hitter went into a decline at age 34 doesn’t mean that another player with similar stats will as well.
Another major flaw in the projection system is the abundance of performance-enhancing drugs in the last 20 years. While these players might have been completely clean, it is strange that we saw certain players (Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens) have career upswings right around the time they should have been declining.
We also saw some players (Sammy Sosa, David Ortiz) drop off tremendously right around the time stricter drug testing was put into effect.
One valid concern raised is that traditionally, large sluggers in Howard’s mold have not aged particularly well. Howard has worked to counter this, losing 30 pounds over the past two years and undergoing a rigid training regimen. Still, large bodies do tend to break down sooner than smaller ones, and Howard is about as large as they come in baseball.
So it’s clear that the statheads are opposed to the contract. But how do I feel about it? I’m happy, but I do have some concerns.
One big issue I have with the contract is that it wasn’t necessary to do at this time. They had Howard signed for the next two seasons. While he might have been a free agent and able to cash in on the open market in two years, first base is one of the easiest positions to fill. There might have been a number of good first basemen available, such as Prince Fielder.
But in recent years, the Phillies have shown great fear of competing in free agency. The whole Roy Halladay-Cliff Lee maneuvering was done specifically so that they wouldn’t be bidding on a free agent pitcher.
I understand their fear of the open market somewhat. It only takes one team making a ridiculous free-agent offer to a player to drive his price up.
For an example of this, see the Phillies’ pursuit of Jim Thome in 2003. The Indians probably thought Thome would never leave, but along came the Phillies with money to spend and the desire to bring in a big name, and the Indians could no longer afford him.
But while open bidding can be frightening, there is also a good chance that the market for Howard wouldn’t have been as open as the Phillies thought. After all, there are only a few teams in baseball who can afford the type of contract that Howard would have demanded (and was ultimately given). If none of those teams were willing to offer up the money, then Howard’s demands would have to come down.
Since Howard was still two years from free agency, I’m not sure why they gave him such a long and expensive contract. Usually when a player signs before free agency, there is some concession on his part. Some players prefer the comfort of security rather than the uncertainty of free agency. There didn’t seem to be any concession on Howard’s part. So if the Phillies were just going to give him what he wanted, why didn’t they wait?
However, my biggest reason for trepidation about the deal is because I don’t want the contract to become a burden on the Phillies’ budget. I don’t want to hear, “Well, we don’t have money to pay other players because Howard is making so much.” People are already fearing that outfielder Jayson Werth will be leaving as a free agent after this season because the Phillies seem maxed out on their budget.
While the Howard deal probably doesn’t affect Werth’s status (the new contract is actually an extension that doesn’t start until 2012), it might affect their ability to retain players like Cole Hamels and Jimmy Rollins when their contracts come due.
But those concerns aside, I like the deal.
The two most difficult things to find in baseball are a legitimate ace pitcher and a power hitter to anchor the lineup. Howard certainly anchors the Phillies’ lineup. The guy is almost guaranteed to hit 40-plus home runs and have 120-plus RBI every season.
The statheads will point out that his on-base percentage may not be the best on the team, but his job is not necessarily to get on base, but rather to get the runners home—and he is clearly succeeding.
(Side note: I find it funny that the same people who claim that Howard only gets a lot of RBI because of the Phillies’ strong lineup also criticize leadoff hitter Rollins’ low on-base percentage. You can’t have it both ways.)
If the guy is such a liability, like some claim, then why are the Phillies succeeding? Why have they won three straight division titles, two pennants, and a World Series with Howard as their cleanup hitter? Why have they led the NL in runs the past two seasons? I don’t think they’d be able to do all this if Howard was truly a liability.
Another aspect of Howard that is often overlooked is the way that he changes the game. In a late-game situation, with runners on base, there are few, if any, managers who will not bring in a left-hander to face him, assuming they don’t just go ahead and intentionally walk him. You can be sure that when a pitcher is brought in to face Howard, he is going to be as careful as possible. Howard usually deposits mistake pitches into the seats.
While he can be gotten out by a good left-hander, the fact is that there are very few good left-handed pitchers out there. One reason why the Yankees had success against Howard in the World Series was because they had multiple effective left-handed relievers that they could bring in to face him. They might be the only team capable of doing that.
There’s another factor that statheads often overlook (and sometimes deride because it can’t be measured by statistics). While “clutchness” is extremely subjective and hard to define, Howard definitely seems to have it. I’ve seen him go through hot stretches where he absolutely carries the team.
In September 2008, when the team was fighting for the division title, Howard was delivering big hit after big hit to carry the team to the postseason. Last year in the playoffs, his memorable game-tying double in the NLDS was only the highlight of the way he destroyed the Rockies‘ and Dodgers‘ pitching during the Phillies’ march to the World Series.
Looking past his contributions on the field, there are other reasons why locking up Howard was a good idea. Barring an unforeseen injury or career downturn, when his career is done he will be in the discussion of greatest Phillies hitter ever. While it’s unfair to compare stats between the 1980s and 2000s, Howard’s power stats will likely eclipse Mike Schmidt on top of the Phillies’ all-time list.
While in theory it’s easy to say, “Oh, the Phillies can just find another first baseman,” in actuality it’s a huge blow to a team and its fanbase when a star player and franchise icon leaves. Howard was one of the key players who helped end Philadelphia’s championship drought, and fans have grown attached to him. It would be devastating to many of them if Howard were to ever leave.
For years, Phillies fans were used to ownership not spending a lot of money on players. They knew that the Phillies were never going to bring in the big money free agents. But things have changed, and now the Phillies are among the financial powers of the league. They’re paying big money to their star players, and I can’t possibly complain about that.
It’s much better than being a fan of teams like the Indians, who see CC Sabathia and Cliff Lee depart because the team knows they can’t re-sign them once they become free agents. It’s comforting to know that Phillies management is willing to pay what it takes to keep their star players in town.
So in the end, I am glad that Howard got his contract. I salute the Phillies for doing so and look forward to several more prosperous years with Howard leading the way.
Originally posted on my blog: http://phillyfanindc.wordpress.com
Read more Philadelphia Phillies news on BleacherReport.com
Roy Halladay Deal Proves the Phillies Are Good, but They Ain’t the Yankees
A year ago, if you had told me that the Phillies would trade for Roy Halladay, and that I, like most Phillies fans, would be a little disappointed about it, I would have never believed you.
Halladay is a star pitcher, formerly of the Toronto Blue Jays. He won the 2003 American League Cy Young Award and is generally considered among the top five pitchers in baseball.
While I am thrilled that the Phillies are gaining his services, I am still slightly disappointed by the team’s actions.
Last year at the trading deadline, when the Blue Jays made it clear that they were open to trading Halladay, the Phillies were thought to be one of the leading candidates. Halladay had a no-trade clause, meaning he could veto any trade. But based on reports, the Phillies met most of his criteria for a trade destination: an East Coast team and a contender, and their Spring Training complex in Clearwater, FL is near his home.
However, Blue Jays J.P. Ricciardi made insanely high trade demands for Halladay that the Phillies would not meet. The Blue Jays were asking for the Phillies’ top pitching prospect Kyle Drabek and their top hitting prospect Dominic Brown, as well as pitcher J.A. Happ, who was already a key part of the Phillies’ major league roster. It was reported that they wanted some other top prospects included as well.
This trade would have decimated their farm system and hurt their current major league roster.
Wisely, the Phillies balked at those demands, and when the Blue Jays didn’t relent, they decided instead to trade for Cleveland Indians pitcher Cliff Lee. Lee wasn’t as highly regarded as Halladay—although certainly no slouch since he did win the 2008 AL Cy Young Award—and therefore they were able to get him for a much lesser haul of prospects, none of whom looked to be major contributors to the Phillies in the near future.
The deal was a successful one, as Lee was good in the regular season and amazing in the playoffs. Without him, the Phillies probably don’t win the National League and might have been swept in the World Series. Even if Lee had been a free agent after the World Series, it would have been considered a good deal.
Lee is going to be a free agent after the 2010 season, so naturally, the Phillies tried to get him to sign a contract extension. But his agent kept saying that Lee wanted to hit the open market and get the best deal possible. Ace pitchers are hard to come by, and it was likely that teams would be willing to give him a lot of money.
Also, the Phillies do not like signing pitchers to contracts longer than three years (probably a good idea since if you look at pitchers signed to long-term deals, the teams almost always regret it), and it looked like they would have to in order to re-sign Lee. There was the very real possibility that they would lose him to free agency.
Meanwhile, Toronto hired a new GM (Ricciardi was fired, and the nail in the coffin may have been his mishandling of the Halladay situation) and once again made it clear that Halladay would be available. Since it was a season later, the trade demands would be lower.
An added bonus is that if they traded for Halladay, he would probably sign a (slightly) below market extension, meaning that they wouldn’t have to worry about losing or overpaying him after the season.
The Phillies were once again rumored to be the leaders to get Halladay, and Phillies fans began to dream of a pitching rotation led by Halladay, Lee, and Cole Hamels, who despite his troubles last year does have ace material and was the 2008 World Series MVP.
With those three at the front of the rotation, it would be hard to beat the Phillies in a playoff series. (Sure, they’d still have to make the playoffs, but with those three pitchers leading their lineup, probably the only thing that could stop them would be a few major injuries.)
Anyway, word started to spread on Monday that the Phillies were indeed going to trade for Halladay. The euphoria lasted only a few seconds before it was announced that they would then trade Lee to the Seattle Mariners for prospects.
Instead of having two star pitchers at the front of the rotation, they would have only one—and it wouldn’t be the one who had already proven himself to be a postseason star.
Why did the Phillies ruin their fans’ dreams of having the best pitching rotation in the majors? There are a few reasons.
First, even though the demands were lower, trading for Halladay still came with a high price. They had to give up Drabek, along with two other highly rated prospects. Combined with the prospects they traded to Cleveland for Lee last season, the Phillies’ minor league system had been greatly diminished.
They were able to get three good prospects (although not rated as highly as the ones they gave up) from the Mariners in exchange for Lee.
Probably the more crucial reason they traded Lee was because having both Lee and Halladay in the rotation would have cost the Phillies too much money in payroll.
When the subject comes to money, Phillies fans always get a bit edgy. The team has long been perceived as being cheap and unwilling to spend money on premium free agents. Fans blame the team’s cheapness for why they spent so many years without making the playoffs.
This is only partially true. The Phillies did give decent contracts to players in the ’90s, only it often gave them to the wrong ones (Gregg Jefferies for example). The bigger reason why the team wasn’t any good was because their minor league system never produced any good players. Still, the Phillies often claimed that they didn’t have enough money to truly compete for the best free agents available.
As the decade turned, the Phillies began to build a new stadium, which would provide them with much more revenue than their old one. Ownership claimed that they would use this added income to build a better team—and they actually lived up to their word. After years of not going after the biggest names on the market, suddenly they were signing expensive players like Jim Thome and David Bell.
Anyone who follows baseball knows that sports economics are a bit messed up. Smaller market teams essentially serve as feeders for the larger market teams. Teams in the smaller markets are essentially forced to trade star players before they hit free agency, because they know that once they become free agents, they’ll never be able to afford them.
This is essentially why players like Cliff Lee and Roy Halladay were available. Their teams wanted to get something for them instead of watching them walk away for nothing.
For years, the Phillies had been one of the teams that traded away their stars. Early in the decade, they essentially gave away Scott Rolen and Curt Schilling and then watched them win the World Series on other teams. So for Phillies fans, it was a very nice change of pace to have them as one of the big market teams that can take advantage of this.
Except maybe Phillies fans got a little too caught up in things, because it caused them to forget something:
They ain’t the Yankees.
There are small market teams, and then there are big market teams—and in a category all by themselves are the New York Yankees.
The Yankees are dangerous because they have, by far, the most money and the willingness to spend whatever it takes to win. Last year, when CC Sabathia and Mark Teixeira were free agents, the Yankees were able to sign them both simply by blowing everyone else away.
(Yankees fans can feel free to mention that those players also signed due to the Yankees’ championship-level core and the desire to play in New York, but really, in the end, money talks and BS walks.)
If the Yankees were in this situation and had the chance to obtain both Halladay and Lee, knowing that it would give them a great shot at another world title, would they have done it? Yes, I think they would have.
To the Phillies’ credit, it clearly wasn’t all about money. They could have pretty much given away Joe Blanton, since his salary is similar to Lee’s this season, and he will also be a free agent after the season. But while Blanton is a good mid-level starting pitcher, they wouldn’t have gotten nearly the quality of prospects they received for Lee.
Of course, had they not signed Jamie Moyer to a two-year contract before last season, they’d also have more money available. (I like Moyer, but even before last season it was questionable how much he had left. Signing him to a two-year deal seemed a bit too much.)
The funny thing is, if you had gone a year back in time and asked Phillies fans, “If you won another pennant and then went into the following season with Roy Halladay, would you be happy?” I think everyone would have given a resounding YES! But once the dream of “Halladay AND Lee” entered their minds, then only having one of them became a huge disappointment.
On the surface to Phillies fans, here’s what it looks like: They got rid of their ace pitcher (a postseason hero at that) for a different ace pitcher. In doing so, they gave up a lot of minor league prospects that they’ve been hearing so much about.
Part of the problem is that as fans of a baseball team, you not only become attached to the players on the roster, you also become attached to the prospects. Teams love to tout the “hot prospects” they have brewing in the minor leagues.
Last year, when the Phillies were first talking about trading for Halladay, we heard all this talk about how good guys like Kyle Drabek and Michael Taylor were going to be. While counting on prospects is a bad idea (there are thousands of “can’t miss” prospects who missed and missed badly), when you hear so much hype about them, it’s only natural to get excited.
While they may have gotten some prospects back from Seattle in exchange for Lee, it’s tough for Phillies fans to get that excited about them. They’ve been hearing about how great Drabek and Taylor are going to be. They haven’t heard anything about Phillippe Aumont or Tyson Gillies because they’ve been in the Seattle system.
In reality, it isn’t like the Phillies are in a bad situation. Sure, they have traded a lot of prospects, but keep in mind that the prospects traded last season already helped them earn a National League pennant.
More importantly, they now have one of the best pitchers in baseball (ultimately, most people think he’s even better than Cliff Lee) under their control for the next few seasons, while they were probably only going to get one more season out of Lee.
While the prospects they traded away may develop into stars, you have to ask who will help the Phillies more in the next three years: the prospects or Roy Halladay? I’ll take my chances with Halladay.
As it stands now, the Phillies will go into next season as the favorites to win the National League once again. If they had kept Lee, they would have been an overwhelming favorite, but it might have left their minor leagues even more barren than they are now.
While that may seem like a small concern, keep in mind that injuries happen, and it’s nice to be able to replenish the roster from the minor leagues or possibly use those minor leaguers to make a trade. After all, you never know when a small market team will be looking to trade away one of their players.
Of course, they might get outbid on that player by another team, maybe even the Yankees. Because if there’s one thing that 2009 has taught me, it’s that while the Phillies are good, they ain’t the Yankees.
This article originally published on my blog: http://thecutterrambles.wordpress.com
Read more Philadelphia Phillies news on BleacherReport.com