Is the bench really "signifcantly" upgraded?
by byosti on Feb 8, 2010 3:14 AM EST
Email
PrintI have been starting to think I'm the only one out there not exactly excited about our new and supposedly much improved bench. From message boards and discussions I seen on casual Phillies sites or groups the overwhelming consensus has been that virtually every bench replacement has been a significant upgrade. I don't really buy it.
More after the jump.....
Think back to this scenario... Game 3 of the World Series tied 1-1, down by 2 runs with 2 outs in bottom of the 6th and a man on first, and up to the plate comes...........wait for it..........................Juan Castro. Would you really be that much more excited for him than who he replaced, Eric Bruntlett, in the same situation. Going from a .231/.303/.330 career hitter to a .230/.270/.332 hitter isn't exactly going from a Pinto to a Bentley. Both play multiple positions and I'd give the slight edge to Castro in fielding, but when you consider Castro doesn't play any outfield, and Bruntlett has been successful there, it essentially cancels out Castro's slight edge elsewhere. Also, it would make no sense putting in Castro as a late inning defensive replacement at 2B, 3B, or SS(the positions he plays) when he is not better than either of the starting options. At least Bruntlett could occasionally spell the defense- lacking Ibanez and provide a defensive upgrade in left field. If anything, that would make Bruntlett more valuable than Castro in the field.
I also don't think replacing Gload instead of Stairs strike fear in the hearts of relief pitchers anywhere. At least Stairs could get the occasional walk(11.9% career) and still had decent pop(.184 iso in 09) compared with the soft hitting Gload(.125 career iso) who doesn't walk at a good rate(6.1% career). For those of you who still love average, yes Gload is a better hitter for average than Stairs, but consider Stairs' BABIP last year was 68 points lower than his career norm. He is closer to a .250 hitter than the .194 he showed last year. I don't think the about 30 point would be difference between the two is enough to make up for the difference in walks and power. One edge Gload has is fielding, although he is much closer to Pat Burrell than Franklin Gutierrez in the outfield(-32.4 career UZR). I just can't give the edge in fielding to someone who has the speed of the Stay Puft Marshmallow Man. Would have been great if we could have gotten the recently signed the cheaper, better Ryan Garko but I will assume he preferred the chance to start more often in Seattle.
The last replacement is probably the clearest upgrade, although still rather small in my eyes. Bako was atrocious offensively. There is no other way of looking at it. His 59 OPS+ over the last three years is a testament to that. However, Schneider's 79 OPS+ over the past three years is not exactly that of a raker either. Last year alone their wOBA were almost identical at .281 and .278, respectively although Scheider was the unluckier hitter last year. Both were almost identical last year fielding according the fans scouting report with a 3.17 average rating for Schneider and a 3.19 for Bako. I probably should include Coste also since he still played a decent amount of time for the Phillies last year. His 81 OPS+ over the past three years is the best of the bunch but his fielding is a notch below, scoring a 2.43, one of the worst in the majors. Given Bako and Schneider's equal fielding and the latter's edge in offense, albeit not a large edge, is an upgrade but I wouldn't consider it a big one.
You can still be the judge for yourself, but to me two pushes and one slight upgrade is not what I would call "significantly" better than last year.
8 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Well-reasoned post, and I agree on most fronts.
The Castro signing still baffles me — Amaro said something to the effect of sacrificing offense for defense, but I’m not seeing much evidence that Castro is that much better defensively to outweigh his offensive ineptness. I still say I’d have signed Jerry Hairston instead.
Gload is what he is, and I understand Amaro’s reasoning for signing him: he’s a career .300/.358/.425 pinch hitter. Some guys are cut out for the role and others aren’t, and Gload seems to embrace it. That being said, I’d have gambled on Eric Hinske instead, who offers more power, patience, and defensive value than Gload. They’re both making $1 million this year, but Gload has a cool $1.6 million lined up for next year as well.
As for Schneider, I think that’s where I disagree with you. Schneider’s a pretty clear upgrade over Bako. He’s younger, strikes out half as much, and the infant metrics that are out there (such as this) think he’s better defensively as well. Hopefully Schneider doesn’t have to play enough for it to really matter, but in the event of a Chooch injury, being able to start Schneider instead of Bako is a huge upgrade.
A final point to consider: the 2010 will be a “significant” upgrade from the 2009 version because of the simply awful years turned in by those guys. Just look at this…
- Greg Dobbs: .247/.296/.383 (169 PA)
- Paul Bako: .224/.308/.336 (160 PA)
- Matt Stairs: .194/.357/.379 (129 PA)
- Chris Coste: .245/.342/.382 (118 PA)
- Eric Bruntlett .171/.224/.238 (118 PA)
- Ben Francisco: .278/.317/.526 (104 PA)
In other words, the bench is upgraded from the standpoint that even if Castro isn’t significantly better than Bruntlett career-wise, there’s almost no way he hits worse than a 22 OPS+ next year. Given that, a full season of Francisco, and (you’d think) some sort of bounceback for Dobbs, and I don’t doubt the bench will be more productive. Talent-wise, the bench may not be significantly upgraded, but I fully expect the 2010 bench to be a significant upgrade over the 2009 version as far as production is concerned.
I don’t expect Castro to get more than 100 AB. The other bench guys will get the remaining 700 AB available. He fits in well as the infield defensive bench guy. If they needed 250 AB, I think they would have spent more and got a guy like Hairston.
Sure, if you assume that neither Rollins nor Utley gets hurt this year. But you know what happens when you assume.
Hairston got $2.1 million, while Castro got $0.75. So the question is, would it have been worth $1.35 million for the insurance that Hairston would provide in the event of a major injury. Castro is passable as a defensive replacement/warm body, but his insurance value is basically nil.
Maybe Amaro + Charlie think that there are enough bats to make up to for or minimize the loss in offensive production?
I ‘d be tempted to add more quality there but the higher priced bench player might demand more starts than we are willing to give if the infield remains healthy which isn’t cost effective. However there were plenty of games when with a substanial lead Charlie did not pull his infielders. This type of substitution wouldn’t be for rest but to limit the chance for a meaningless injury. Actually, if it were up to me, I would prefer seeing not only our players, but all of MLB use their utility men even more than they do now as rest is, by baseball in general, undervalued and misunderstood esp. in regards to the central nervous system.
Agreed and I do think we will see Castro a good amount this year. They have already noted and its clearly visable, someone like Utley need at least 6-7 games off a year to relax, maybe more; then there is someone like Polanco who is in his mid 30’s so some time off will benefit him, maybe 15-20 games. That and if Jimmy starts to blow, he needs to blow some bubbles on the bench.
I do think we will see Castro a good amount this year.
Agreed. Which is why we should have signed somebody better than him, because he’s likely to get 150 to 200 at bats.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on The Good Phight
Related FanShots on The Good Phight
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
