Royals Insider: Tony Pena
As we delve forth into the biographical and prediction-filled journey that is Royals Insider, we must recap a blast from the past, in the affectionate name of Tony Pena. Of course, I'm not referring to that Tony Pena. Or that Tony Pena. I'm talking about our newest Major League shortstop acquisition.

Yes, that Tony Pena! Mierda!
Born in San Pedro de Macoris, Dominican Republic, Pena was signed as an undrafted free agent by the Atlanta Braves in the summer of 1999. Throughout the first two seasons in the Chops' farm system, Pena established himself as a little-power and little-contact hitter, but a defensive wizard nonetheless. Unlike some prospects, who waver and flash throughout their career, Pena's career Minor League numbers tell the entire story. His OPS-es from 2000 through 2006 were .495, .585, .593, .632, .648, .632, and .666, respectively. Uncannily low by any regard. Pena's defense, at the beginning, was also rather uninspiring. In his six years in the minors, he never posted a fielding percentage higher than .965, playing only shortstop and nothing else. Perhaps, because Pena began playing baseball at the age of 16, it's meaningful to expect him to improve?
Slightly, but not necessarily founded.
Despite hitting a somewhat flukish 11 home runs for AA Greenville in 2004, Pena has solidified himself as the player that he is. However, what is perhaps most notable about Pena's Minor League record is his ever-so-slight improvement at each stop upward on the organizational ladder. The offensive numbers are paltry at best, as his OPS has never topped the .666 he compiled for AAA Richmond in 299 at-bats in 2006. His Minor League totals respectively are unbelievably low - a .252/.285/.332 hitter in the minor leagues will certainly never translate well into the big-leagues.
On March 23, 2007, the Royals traded starting pitcher and 2004 fourth round draft pick Erik Cordier for Pena. Desperately seeking a shortstop, Dayton Moore and the Royals would grant the 26-year-old everyday opportunities for the entire 2007 season. Pena would play slightly below replacement value overall, according to the sabermetric statistic VORP (Value Over Replacement Player), which, mind you, does not include defense in its study. Before the 2006 season, three Baseball Prospectus writers voted for Tony Pena to win the Cristian Antonio Guzman Award for the position player most likely to put up the lowest VORP in regular playing time. In fact, he won the award for lowest VORP (-7.8) and Runs Created (47) for a regular shortstop. Meanwhile, Cordier had been plagued with injuries most of his career, having missed all of the 2005 season while recovering from a knee injury, and missing 2007 and part of 2006 with Tommy John elbow reconstruction project. The Braves more or less took Cordier as a long-term gamble, while sacrificing a player stuck in their Minor League purgatory, playing second fiddle to then-shortstop Edgar Renteria.
Despite his lackluster at the very best offense, Royals scouts herald his arm, range, and glove, using him in the same sentence as no-punch, all-field ex-Royal ballplayer Fred Patek. However, on July 7, 2007, he broke the club record for consecutive at-bats (192) without a walk.
Ideally, Pena's days as an everyday are probably numbered. At age 27, I'm expecting him to improve ever so slightly from his 2007 campaign offensively and defensively, as he matures physically and gains only his eleventh year of experience playing the game, period. Pena will likely receive everyday playing time as a shortstop, spelling Esteban German, Angel Berroa, Alberto Callaspo, or Jason Smith on that rare occasion.
Here is my crystal ball for Pena's 2008:
GS/G: 139/144
AB: 524
H: 140
BA: .267
OBP: .300
SLG: .355
OPS: .655
1B: 106
2B: 29
3B: 4
HR: 1
RBI: 33
BB: 19
K: 83
SB: 6
CS: 4
OPS+: 72
But the guy can field!....(for reasons I will explain below.)
On-field performance:
Significant dropoff from 2007: 25%
Repeats 2007 form: 55%
Numbers improved from 2007: 20%
Injury contingency:
Injured for 15 days or more: 5%
Whereabouts:
Chances traded before Opening Day: 10%
Chances traded, dropped, or demoted mid-season: 25%
Job allocation:
Starting shortstop: 75%
Backup/reserve: 15%
Platoon: 5%
Sent back to Omaha: 5%
ASSETS:
Ultimately, I feel Pena's liabilities at the dish do not compensate for his exceptional defensive abilities. His utter lack of power combined with a complete lack of plate poise make Pena an automatic out in any league and in any situation. Perhaps his only redeeming quality is his ability to make decent contact. However, I'm skeptical Pena can even continue demonstrating that attribute in 2008. Although I would love to witness him improve significantly - or even marginally - next season, I'm not banking on it. I tabbed his OPS+ at an underwhelming six points above last year, but, sadly, he'll probably only perform slightly above replacement level. I'm not even sure Jason Smith would be much less of a liability at the shortstop position than our light-hitting friend.
I believe what the front office must comprehend is that the 1970's and the 1980's no longer exist. No longer can a team truly count on an automatic out in the lineup, even if he has superior defensive abilities. In an era where injuries occur so frequently and teams never second guess sending a slightly injured player directly to the 15-Day D.L.- or more - counting on Pena, even in the #9 slot, defense included, will probably not make us significantly better in the short term or long term.
0 recs |
60 comments
Comments
Pena
by royaldaddy on
Jan 16, 2008 1:14 AM EST
reply
actions
0 recs
I think .275/.300/.400 is doable
by NYRoyal on
Jan 16, 2008 1:23 AM EST
reply
actions
0 recs
i'd be shocked
Now, it's not out of the realm of possibilities that hit that 275/300/400 line, but I don't think we should bank on it happening.
On a related, but somewhat depressing, note, Baseball Prospectus just named Eric Cordier the sleeper prospect for 2008 on today's Top 11 Atlanta Braves Prospects.
by marbotty on
Jan 16, 2008 7:15 AM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Sleeper prospect
by NYRoyal on
Jan 16, 2008 11:38 AM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
his major injury is the same
As for the secondary pitches, I have no idea how Cordier stacks up. BP certainly seems bullish on him.
by marbotty on
Jan 16, 2008 12:33 PM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Injury and pitching prospects
BP's "bullishness" is that they are calling him a "sleeper prospect." I can't be too impressed by that. A small percentage of top pitching prospects become good or even decent major league pitchers. What percentage of "sleeper prospects" reach that level of even minimal success?
I'd much rather have TPJ right now than Eric "the sleeper" Cordier and the long road he has to maybe...possibly throwing a few innings in the majors.
by NYRoyal on
Jan 16, 2008 12:46 PM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
age old question
by Dani Woodward on
Jan 16, 2008 10:38 AM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
my memory is that Pena had some dramatic
lets see his monthly splits:
April: .204/.245/.301
May: .330/.352/.409
June: .282/.279/.359
July: .333/.337/.462
August: .128/.160/.141
Spet: .333/.338/.478
So yea... a little bit of everything. Still, there were definitely extended periods of time in which he was a + hitter and a + defender.
by royalsreview on
Jan 16, 2008 10:44 AM EST
reply
actions
0 recs
Stopgap only
Nothing against Pena - I think he would make an ideal utility man.
Royals have their team sorta set up backwards in the middle infield - good defense, little offense starting, and then good offense, avg defense on the bench in German/Callaspo. Sorta the opposite of what good teams have, IMHO.
Don't get me wrong - I'm not saying German should be starting over Pena or anything - just that one could make a good argument that utility infield combo of German and Callaspo might be the best in ALL of baseball. Of all the things you want to have the best of, that's probably not it...
by loyal2s dad on
Jan 16, 2008 10:44 AM EST
reply
actions
0 recs
All good points
by DC Royal on
Jan 16, 2008 11:34 AM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
TPJ!
by RoyalsRetro on
Jan 16, 2008 11:28 AM EST
reply
actions
0 recs
TPJ
by MooseTacos25 on
Jan 16, 2008 11:39 AM EST
reply
actions
0 recs
i sorta like him as well
by royalsreview on
Jan 16, 2008 11:49 AM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Me too
by RoyalsRetro on
Jan 16, 2008 11:53 AM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I don't love him, but don't give up on him
I'm not saying we should be confident that he's the entire package and we should lock him down with a lifetime contract. But we should definitely give him another season (or at least a half season) to see if his hitting can improve enough to make him a legitimate long-term solution. If not, then we can move on without him and explore other options. But I think writing him off in January 2008 is pretty silly.
by NYRoyal on
Jan 16, 2008 12:22 PM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I'm not saying either one
by MooseTacos25 on
Jan 16, 2008 12:40 PM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
okay, I'll say it then
In fact, I'm counting on a decline -- perhaps maxing out his average at .250.
Since he has no power and doesn't walk, there's no reason to believe he can survive that sort of drop in batting average without a similar drop in OPS and offensive value. Perhaps he'll manage to hit another homerun or two, but it will likely be accompanied by a huge drop in triples, essentially negating any gains.
On the positive side, this decline probably won't matter that much, as Butler and Gordon's improvement will hopefully more than make up for it.
by marbotty on
Jan 16, 2008 1:04 PM EST
reply
actions
0 recs
I see a bet coming
by NYRoyal on
Jan 16, 2008 1:15 PM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
sure
by marbotty on
Jan 16, 2008 4:09 PM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I'm flexible
by NYRoyal on
Jan 16, 2008 4:24 PM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
we should probably have a minimum # of at bats
by marbotty on
Jan 16, 2008 4:33 PM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
It's a bet
by NYRoyal on
Jan 16, 2008 4:48 PM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
but look at his monthly splits...
by royalsreview on
Jan 16, 2008 1:18 PM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
and equally long stretches
But I certainly agree that he is not a total disaster.
by Gopherballs on
Jan 16, 2008 1:59 PM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
What about the timing?
by NYRoyal on
Jan 16, 2008 3:20 PM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
And his absolute worst month was August
Gordon's best months were June and August and his worst were April and July.
Grudzielanek's best month was July and his worst were May and September.
See any signifance there, because I sure don't?
Should anyone be surprised if he makes a little less contact, showed a little less patience at the plate and hit with a little less power and had longer cold streaks?
by Gopherballs on
Jan 16, 2008 4:15 PM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Answer
Yes, I think that would definitely be a surprise. How often do you think a full-time player in his first full season with an OPS of 640 follows that up in his second full season with a worse OPS? By the way, I'm willing to make the same bet with you that I'm making with Marbotty.
by NYRoyal on
Jan 16, 2008 4:20 PM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
probably doesn't happen that often
by marbotty on
Jan 16, 2008 4:25 PM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
That kind of OPS for a SS isn't uncommon
Vizquel
Pena
Lugo
Lopez
Theriot
Uribe
2006:
Barmes
Cedeno
Crosby
Everett
2005:
Guzman
Izturis
J. Wilson
There were more, but some were scrubs. Clearly many were not. I don't think the above guys are about to get cut.
by NYRoyal on
Jan 16, 2008 4:46 PM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Tony Pena Jr.
by djk royal on
Jan 16, 2008 5:41 PM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
As a newcomer I won't argue with you...
by MooseTacos25 on
Jan 16, 2008 1:21 PM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
his best months were July and Spt
There are flashes of competence here. Well, hitting .270 with no walks but some doubles, competence.
by LeoBloom on
Jan 16, 2008 1:31 PM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
fair point
by marbotty on
Jan 16, 2008 4:08 PM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
the genius of the pena deal is this
valuing defense is the new market advantage
his offense just needs to be non-historically-horrible and he's a decent stopgap
as soon as he's arb eligible, GMDM should go find another version of him
by LeoBloom on
Jan 16, 2008 1:29 PM EST
reply
actions
0 recs
Oh yeah
I would not expect too much improvement from him. With his skillset, his offensive value is entirely wrapped up with hitting the ball for a decent average, running as fast as he can, and hoping the ball finds enough of a gap in the defense that he can get as many bases as possible. Any improvement would derive from an increase in his batting average, because he is never going to walk much more than he does now or add any distance to his power (although the more gaps he finds, the more his SLG goes up).
The problem is, significantly improving his batting average will be difficult because, relatively speaking, he is not a very good contact hitter and strikes out about 15% of the time (which is consistent with his minor league numbers). The protype for this type of player (think Rey Sanchez) should strike out at half that rate. If he can inch his line up to 285/300/375, we should be happy with that.
by Gopherballs on
Jan 16, 2008 2:09 PM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
TPJ should be a Royal for a long time
He can hit .260 the rest of his career for all I care as long as he learns to bunt. He has good speed so he can be an asset on the bases, and learning to bunt could gain him a few hits every year. The NL has to carry a pitcher in lineup, TPJ looks better than almost any pitcher I have seen. We can carry him on the team (as long as he learns to bunt). And I have no doubt that his offense will improve after just a single season. I am not saying he will evolve into Jeter, just into a player that can move the runners when necessary.
by eakers on
Jan 16, 2008 2:45 PM EST
reply
actions
0 recs
Agree on the defense
by Gopherballs on
Jan 16, 2008 3:19 PM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
27 is the end of the developmental curve?
One should also take into account that he didn't play baseball at all until he was 16, so I think his developmental curve is skewed off of normal.
For his skillset and tools, there really is not much room left for him to grow.
Actually, I think with is skillset, tools and the performance we saw in 2007, there is only room for improvement.
by NYRoyal on
Jan 16, 2008 3:23 PM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
27 is where the curve levels off
Pena's career lines bear this out, as he has basically repeated the same average/on-base performance since age 22 and the same power since age 23, improving just enough to post the same basic line against better competition at the next level.
249/274/311 Low A age 21
259/301/328 High A age 22
255/278/366 AA age 23
261/295/352 AAA ages 24 & 25
267/284/356 MLB age 26
Go look at PECOTA projections for guys with similar age and size to Pena along with his track record of showing low isolated power/low BB%/high K%/high GB% skills, and find one that is optimistic for anything more than marginal improvement. Again, everyone should be pretty happy if he can add 40 to 60 points to his OPS.
Where exactly in his skillset, tools, and performance lies the basis for an expectation of any significant improvement?
by Gopherballs on
Jan 16, 2008 5:17 PM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
That's not quite right
According to the same research you cite, a position player's development generally levels off when he enters his peak years of 26-29 -- hence, the "curve" part of the term "development curve." Thus, it is fair to say that a 27 year old would be at the end of the development curve, not the middle or the beginning.
I think you are misinterpreting the research. A player's peak -- his best year -- should come somewhere in ages 26 to 29. But a player's best years, sometimes referred to as the "peak plateau" go from the late 20's to early 30's. So, 26-29 is when a player will likely his his peak, but his best years will be from 26-33.
So my only point is that one can't look at a 27 year old player and say "this is the peak; it's all down hill from ehre." Some players peak at 26, while others peak at 29 or somewhere in between. For all we know, TPJ may have peaked, or his peak may still be coming. Again, considering the fact that he didn't start playing baseball until age 16, I think his developmental curve is skewed off normal.
Again, everyone should be pretty happy if he can add 40 to 60 points to his OPS.
I agree.
Where exactly in his skillset, tools, and performance lies the basis for an expectation of any significant improvement?
I expect some improvement. Whether one should expect significant improvement depends on how one defines "significant." My own amateur scouting analysis is that he can make good contact and has shown good line drive power when he does make contact. With Hillman's increased emphasis on OBP, and with another year of experience and development, I would expect his plate discipline to improve at least somewhat. So I would expect him to draw some more walks (probably not a lot more), make more contact and show some decent line drive power when he does make contact. That is the skill set which should lead to some kind of improvement.
by NYRoyal on
Jan 16, 2008 5:46 PM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I think we are talking about two different things
This is neither what I said nor something with which I would disagree.
Development curve refers to the period during which player's skills typically improve. By age 27, a hitter is physically mature and, in terms of skillsets, essentially a finished product -- for example, a hitter's bat speed and plate coverage skills are not going to improve at age 27 or beyond.
The player's performance follows from his skillset -- namely, how well he uses his various skills in specific situations -- and will vary depending on how he balances those skills out, plus things outside his control like the quality of the pitcher and fielders, placement of the defense, etc. The reason you often see the plateau during the peak years is that the player's skills are no longer improving to any significant degree but have not started to decline.
by Gopherballs on
Jan 17, 2008 12:46 PM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
He started pretty old
by dman126 on
Jan 17, 2008 11:21 AM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Calling all statheads...
Anyone know of evidence showing that this can occur?
*Really, seriously, not trying to start that argument again.
by stuckinstl12 on
Jan 16, 2008 4:04 PM EST
reply
actions
0 recs
it definitely can happen
A good part of that, I'm sure, was the result of IBBs, but I think one will typically find that a for several sluggers, their ability to be patient has a positive effect on their ability to hit for power.
If you look at guys who have had big jumps in their SLG%, there's usually a corresponding jump in their OBP. I just posited that it was patience that drove slugging, but it could easily be the other way around. The important thing is that it happens.
by marbotty on
Jan 16, 2008 4:18 PM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
to follow up on that thought
That doesn't mean they aren't out there. But I wonder if you need to have the ability to drive the ball in order to coax more walks?
I'll leave that for someone else to figure out.
by marbotty on
Jan 16, 2008 4:36 PM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
It makes sense...
by stuckinstl12 on
Jan 16, 2008 4:58 PM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I think Penas problem
by eboston on
Jan 16, 2008 4:09 PM EST
reply
actions
0 recs
Charlie Lau
by philofthenorth on
Jan 16, 2008 5:12 PM EST
reply
actions
0 recs
Mike Barnett is definately
by royaldaddy on
Jan 16, 2008 7:58 PM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
It's telling
I think we all know why : )
by loyal2s dad on
Jan 16, 2008 5:58 PM EST
reply
actions
0 recs
Pena's BABIP
Intuitively, I would say he had relatively normal luck on balls in play, so any improvement will most likely occur due to improved plate discipline.
Can he improve it? Well, sure - there's almost no place to go but up when you post 10 BB vs 78 Ks in over 500 PAs.
Could he get worse? Sure, but perhaps, if he does, it would be from suffering bad luck on balls in play more than actually getting worse with his plate discipline.
Intuitively, I think it would be fairly difficult to improve his walk total SIGNIFICANTLY, absent at least a modicum of power improvement. Obviously, he could improve it SOME, regardless of his slugging percentage.
Personally, the most exciting development might be if he were under 350 ABs on Sept 1st, due to Callaspo wrenching the job from him by hitting out of his mind, which is not completely out of the question, is it?
by loyal2s dad on
Jan 16, 2008 6:07 PM EST
reply
actions
0 recs
18.8% LD%
by Gopherballs on
Jan 16, 2008 6:50 PM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
interesting
by DyeFan187 on
Jan 16, 2008 11:06 PM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Juiced up Team
http://mlbfleecefactor.com/2008/01/16/all-time-teams-the-all-juiced-team/
by ET90210 on
Jan 17, 2008 12:41 PM EST
reply
actions
0 recs
Callapso
What a breath of fresh air it is to actually contemplate the possibility of the Royals being managed well!
by Melchizedek on
Jan 17, 2008 8:32 PM EST
reply
actions
0 recs
I have been since May 2005
by jbrocato on
Jan 18, 2008 6:21 AM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Nobody's claiming that Bell was the sole problem,
by Rowyal on
Jan 18, 2008 9:51 AM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs










