CHUCK JAMES was hurt the whole time

by em3 on Jan 15, 2008 2:18 PM EST Comment 29 comments

Apparently, Chuck James has a small tear in his rotator cuff and has been rehabbing all winter.

As the piece below points out, this adds a little curiosity to the Chuck James/ David DeJesus rumor.

At the time, it looked like KC was winning that deal. Guess not. Poor ethics on ATL's part.

http://mlbfleecefactor.com/2008/01/15/did-braves-try-to-fleece-royals-with-a-damaged-chuck-james/

0 recs | Comment 29 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

A couple thoughts

First, even if James were healthy, I don't think this would have been a "fleece" for the Royals. James stats weren't that great, particularly his peripherals. Add risky mechanics to the mix and it wouldn't have been a smart move.

Second, I doubt there was anything unethical going on here. If Atlanta and KC actually discussed this deal, I'm sure Atlanta disclosed James's injury. In any trade, both sides review the medical records of the players involved as well as give them physicals. There's no way the Royals wouldn't have found out that he was rehabbing a known injury, so Atlanta wouldn't try to hide it.

I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Jan 15, 2008 2:30 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

RE: a couple thoughts

James is a 26 year old lefty with potential #3 or #4 starter stuff, and he's cheap. DeJesus is good, but not great. In my mind, KC would have been winning that deal by a lot.

To your 2nd point, you're probably right to an extent. ATL probably disclosed it, but they certainly wouldn't tell them the extent to which they believe it will affect him, y'know?

by em3 on Jan 15, 2008 2:53 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

+1

I agree. And I'm a huge DJ fan.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Jan 15, 2008 2:58 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Even if James was healthy

Atlanta would have won that trade. Worse CF than DeJesus cost 5 years /$50 million (hello Gary Matthews Jr.) on the open market. DeJesus is under club control for four more years (through his peak) for basically peanuts. Even if you think DeJesus will not rebound from his 2007 offensive performance, he is still one of the fifteen or so best CF in the majors (and probably one of the five best bargains at the position).

Pitchers of James' quality (or better) can be picked up for surplus (see the Bannister trade).

by Gopherballs on Jan 15, 2008 3:06 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Disagree

Pitchers with a 4.00 ERA in 286 MLB innings are not that easy to find. C'mon, we lucked into Bannister and he's only had one good season. That would be like saying "hey, twenty home run hitting centerfielders are easy to find, just look at Josh Hamilton."

Look at the market for pitchers compared to the market for outfielders. Average pitchers get paid way more. Hell, crappy pitchers get paid more. It is much better to have an average pitcher like James than have an average centerfielder like DJ.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Jan 15, 2008 3:15 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

You have to adjust for park, league, and defense

His FIP was an unimpressive 5.16 in 2006 and 5.41 in 2007.

Atlanta plays as a moderate pitcher's park, while the K plays as a moderate hitter's park, and he has pitched in front of one of the best defensive outfields in baseball (led by Andruw Jones).

A move to the AL would hurt him because the fact that every ninth batter switches from a pitcher to a DH should drive down his K/9 rate and increase his BB/9 rate.

He is perhaps the most extreme fly ball pitcher around (27.7% GB% in 2006, 31.0% in 2007), so the high HR rate is not a fluke (and likely to increase in the AL), and he will induce few double play grounders.

His unusually high LOB% (79.4% in 2006 and 81.9% in 2007) and low BABIP (63 point difference between BABIP and xBABIP in 2006 and 34 point difference in 2007) are both major red flags as well.

There is a also quality difference in talent between the AL and NL -- BP put it somewhere around a third- to half- a run last year.

The scouting report does not help him much either, as his (four-seam) fastball sits 88-89 MPH, which is below average for a right-handed starting pitcher.

When you hear people talking about "National League starters," James is the kind of guy they are talking about.

The appropriate comparison fo DeJesus is centerfielders, not outfielders, as corner outfielders are easy to find, but finding guys with an adequate glove and bat for centerfield is very difficult.

by Gopherballs on Jan 15, 2008 4:10 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

FYI

He is a lefty

by MileHighKCfan on Jan 15, 2008 4:20 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

yeah, my bad on that one

He is still a notch below average for a lefty starting pitchers (89-91 MPH)

by Gopherballs on Jan 15, 2008 4:24 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

As a starter

he has a 4.12 ERA over 269 IP. Just in case somebody cared to know since he did have some relief duty in '05 and '06.

by MileHighKCfan on Jan 15, 2008 4:18 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Thank you....

...Exactly my point. Never trade good young left-handed pitching.

by em3 on Jan 15, 2008 5:26 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Yea, but....

ATL has Jordan Shaeffer waiting in the wings for CF. So the alternative to DeJesus wasn't spending $50M on mediocrity. They probably would have just tried to trade DeJesus next winter for a larger bounty, no?

Their line of thinking:

James is hurt, and may hurt us in 2008.
Let's trade him and fill a hole for 2008.
Hey, how about Dejesus? He's exactly what we need in CF and then he'll bring back a nice return if Shaeffer is ready to play every day in 2009.
Call old pal Dayton Moore

by em3 on Jan 15, 2008 3:16 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

i wonder if they eventually told Moore

by royalsreview on Jan 15, 2008 3:30 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

No doubt they did

Even if the current front office is very unethical, you don't hide that kind of thing when you know it would get out anyway if the trade moved forward. Then, the other team would know and you'd get a reputation for trying to trade damaged goods.

I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Jan 15, 2008 3:43 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Chuck James is an iffy #3-4-5 starter

...with dangerous mechanics. David DeJesus and his OBP, speed and defense and long-term cheap contract are worth more than James.

I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Jan 15, 2008 3:43 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

I like DeJesus...

but I think it is generous to say that he is even average when it comes to speed and defense. He gets on base and is a good baserunner that plays a defensive position. However, he worries me in that if his speed drops even a couple ticks more he could become a liability in center field which would force him to a corner position. His lack of power and throwing arm would become even more of a problem in a corner position. I think he has peaked personally.

by djk royal on Jan 15, 2008 4:08 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

DeJesus is well above average defensively

Both UZR (+13 runs) and RZR (.910) had DeJesus tied for the 4th best defensive CF in baseball.

by Gopherballs on Jan 15, 2008 4:15 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

And

...he's way too young for anyone to worry about his skills deteriorating.

I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Jan 15, 2008 4:18 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I hadn't seen his uzr ratings...

I did see his range factor was 2.70 and the league average was 2.71. His fielding percentage was .989 and league average was .990. He also only had 5 assists in 156 games. Again I think he is average now but I'm just worried if he does lose a little speed his skill set doesn't translate well to a corner position. He is 28 now and under contract for 4 more seasons so it is definitely a possibility.

by djk royal on Jan 15, 2008 4:36 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Defensive stats

Fielding %age and number of outfield assists are horrible stats to use to evaluate a player's defensive skills. The only decent fielding stats are the advanced metrics (and they are still limited). Basically, by any good measure of defensive skills, he's a plus defender.

I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Jan 15, 2008 4:48 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Fielding percentage by itself...

is meaningless. When you include it with the fact that his range factor is nothing special it has some meaning. Assists: Some people with great arms don't get challenged so they don't compile assists. This is clearly not the case with DeJesus. Any stat by itself is not overly compelling but taken in context they are a piece of the puzzle. You obviously know this but since you made is seem like I didn't I guess I will state it.

by djk royal on Jan 15, 2008 5:05 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

In short

His UZR and RZR tell you a lot more about his defensive skills than his fielding percentage, range factor (an awful stat) and his OF assists.

I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Jan 15, 2008 5:16 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Range Factor

There are more accurate metrics than range factor.

RF is a formula based to measure total chances by a fielder (9 x (PO+A)/Innings in Field). It was a big step forward from FPCT, but it failed to take into account some important additional information: (1) the actual number of opportunities a fielder receives to field a ball and (2) the difficulty of the play, in that some putouts and assists are more difficult to make than others.

To account for those two things, the newer and more advanced metrics like UZR and RZR use actual play-by-play data. UZR and RZR use two different sets of play-by-play data, so they, in effect, act as cross-checkers for each other. When they agree, like in DeJesus's case, there should be a high level of confidence in that rating (kind of like when statheads and scouts agree on a prospect).

by Gopherballs on Jan 15, 2008 5:33 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

And even if you like Range Factor

DeJesus was well above average in Range Factor for 2005 (2.80) and 2006 (2.93).

by Gopherballs on Jan 15, 2008 5:46 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I tried searching for a listing...

of the uzr for players but couldn't find one. Is there a link you could share?

by djk royal on Jan 15, 2008 5:53 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Sure

http://www.insidethebook.com/ee/index.php/site/comments/best_and_worst_of_2007_uzr/

Mitchell Lichtman, who developed UZR, now works for the Cardinals (I think it is the Cardinals), so the full list is proprietary. He does, however, release the best and worst by position each year (the above link is for 2007). So this works great when a player shows up on either the best or worst list (Best: Pena, Gordon, DeJesus, and Teahen; Worst: Guillen), but for others like Grudz we only know he falls somewhere between Aaron Hill at +14 (well above average of 0) and Brian Roberts at -4 (slightly below average).

The comments section has a lot of good information too (albeit dense in spots). Elsewhere on their site is a downloadable spreadsheet for cumulative UZR for 2003-July 2007.

And djk royal, you are right to adjust a little for an outfielder's arm, as UZR only takes into account range and errors. But as NY Royal pointed out the other day, thehardballtimes.com (THT) recently posted arm ratings. I forget the exact breakdown of the importance between range and arm, but it is weighted heavily toward range. This makes some sense if you think about it, as an outfielder's range usually comes into play at least two-to-three times per game, while his arm only factors into play maybe once or twice per series.

by Gopherballs on Jan 15, 2008 6:45 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs