Royals Sign Brian Anderson to One-Year Major League Deal
by Freneau on Dec 22, 2009 4:26 PM EST
in Kansas City Royals News
Email
PrintPer multiple reports, the Royals have signed outfielder Brian Anderson to a one-year, Major League contract.
I'm amused that when we were discussing this last night, there seemed to be a consensus of "hey, this isn't bad at all, it will be a minor league deal to help depth."
As if Dayton was gonna play it like that.
But I guess this is just another instance of my hindsight bias. Yea. Something like that.
There's no real point in a massive post analyzing this deal. Step one, we need to sit back and wait for the official terms of the contract, which will tell us more about Anderson's role. Anderson's just a guy: he's ok defensively at a premium position and doesn't hit. You can do better, you can do worse. But yes, you can do better. For the price (presumably) you can do better.
I guess the good news is that this might rule out a horrific deal for Scotty Pods.
171 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Major League Deal doesn't make sense to me...
Coffee. The NEW Performance Enhancing drug for Sport's Writers. Just ask Ken Rosenthal.
I guess the good news is that this might rule out a horrific deal for Scotty Pods.
Oh no, Scotty Pods is still happening. Anderson just takes Mitch Maier’s spot on the roster.
To quote the guy off of Super Troopers who ate the 'shrums...
And to teach you guys a lesson, Officer Rabbit and I will stand here and watch as you eat the entire bag.
Please no….
Coffee. The NEW Performance Enhancing drug for Sport's Writers. Just ask Ken Rosenthal.
No way he takes Mitch's spot
Now we can get rid of the hack in LF!!!
Don't Stop Believing!
I guess the good news is that this might rule out a horrific deal for Scotty Pods.
Now you’ve done it… in actuality, Pods and BA developed a strong bond in the Chicago OF in early 2009 and BA’s been brought in to lure Scotty Squarejaw our way.
This is how I cope… expect the worst.
"Greinke and the Brain" (R) (C) TM
by SittinByTheFoulPole on Dec 22, 2009 4:39 PM EST up reply actions
I don't mind a major league deal if the money is right
Something at the $600K level or less would be fine with me. I mean he’s unexciting, but decent. And when you’re talking about money well under the $1M level, you’re talking about peanuts.
The immoderate moderator
I was just getting ready to go back and add that to my post...
Had to be first you know. :)
If it’s under 1M I don’t think I’ll be upset. 600K is a good thing too. I really hope that this means the end for any other “cheap” MLB CF options. I think this means we keep Meche and don’t go for Pie/Pagan.
I wouldn’t mind if we did deal JoGui and $$ to the Mets for Pagan… hmmmm….
Coffee. The NEW Performance Enhancing drug for Sport's Writers. Just ask Ken Rosenthal.
Yup, that's my problem
The money isn’t significant, it’s the roster spot. And furthermore, it’s once again DM’s inability to recognize guys like Anderson (Brian OR Josh) are fungible, readily available goods. You shouldn’t need to offer MLB deals and roster spots to acquire AAA filler.
"Now…put that in your [BLEEP]ing pipe and smoke it." -Hal McRae
"I was doing this when BJ was in his father's nutsack." -Renzo Gracie
by Sweep_the_Leg on Dec 22, 2009 4:35 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Zero I believe
He has to be DFA’d if he does not make the 25-man out of spring training
The DFA provides a nice out if the Royals don't want him on the 25-man roster
Put him on waivers. If someone takes him, he’s gone and the Royals owe him no money. If he clears waivers, assign him to Omaha.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Dec 22, 2009 4:38 PM EST up reply actions
It looks like Anderson is in fact out of options but has not previously been outrighted
If that is the case, the Royals can DFA him at the end of spring training. If he is neither traded nor claimed on waivers during the DFA period, the Royals can outright him to the minors. It would be Anderson’s first outrighting, so he could not refuse the minor league assignment (if it was his second, he could refuse it and immediately become a free agent).
With his service time, his salary should not be guaranteed.
I love MLB's easy-to-understand transaction rules
I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs.
Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Dec 23, 2009 10:53 PM EST up reply actions
I don't think the roster spot is truly guaranteed
I don’t know his option situation, so let’s say for the sake of argument that he’s out of options. If I understand the rules correctly, if the Royals wanted to assign him to the majors, he could either accept the assignment or refuse and thus void his contract and become a FA.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Dec 22, 2009 4:36 PM EST up reply actions
Options shouldn't matter at all
When it comes to fungible talent like this. If we lose him, we lose him. More than likely, if we are sending him to the minors, no one else is going to want him either.
“My god, that guy couldn’t even cut it in Kansas City!”
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
Agreed
I still don’t see this as a bad move so long as the money is in the $500k range. And I can’t imagine its much more than that unless its in some of Dayton’s creative incentives.
I don’t think there will be anything here preventing him from getting the Waechter treatment should he suck.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
Player A, career: .227/.290/.370, 69 OPS+
Player B, career: .272/.313/.352, 75 OPS+
Player A, 2007-2009: .233/.298/.380, 75 OPS+
Player B is Josh Anderson, Player A is Brian Anderson
Ralph Wiggum would be a better GM than Dayton Moore
And then there's defense...
Defense counts.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Dec 22, 2009 4:36 PM EST up reply actions
UZR/150's in CF
Brian Anderson: 0.2 (303 games)
Josh Anderson: -11.2 (77 games)
"Now…put that in your [BLEEP]ing pipe and smoke it." -Hal McRae
"I was doing this when BJ was in his father's nutsack." -Renzo Gracie
by Sweep_the_Leg on Dec 22, 2009 4:39 PM EST up reply actions
that UZR150 for Josh Anderson in LF should probably tell people that UZR for LF is slightly worthless.
Ralph Wiggum would be a better GM than Dayton Moore
it is the sample size that is worthless
346 innings is the equivalent of a hitter’s stats on a road trip.
And for less than one full season, use UZR, not UZR/150. You don’t say a hitter is on pace to hit 55 HRs based on ten games of stats.
i disagree about the /150
i know convention seems to be that you don’t use the rate stat in this type of situation, but the only way to compare apples to apples is if both are scaled to /150. of course the sample size may be throwing things off, but that makes the data irrelevant, not the scale on which the data is presented.
Well, um, actually a pretty nice little Saturday, we're going to go to Home Depot...buy some wallpaper, maybe get some flooring, stuff like that. Maybe Bed, Bath & Beyond, I don't know...I don't know if we'll have enough time.
by SagehenMacGyver47 on Dec 22, 2009 6:47 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
No, the scale does.
It’s like saying, hey I’ve won 2 of my last 3 poker hands! If I can play 30 hands per hour, I should win 20!! I’m gonna be rich!
right, but if all you told me was that you won 2 poker hands, then you haven’t told me anything either. seems like you always have to qualify, but if you don’t present things with comparable rates, then you can’t really compare them.
granted, if someone hit 5 home runs in the only 10 games they played in a season, i probably wouldn’t say (from a statistical/explanatory perspective) that “during the season he was on an 81-HR pace with limited appearances”. i would probably use the counting stat and say “he managed to hit 5-HR in only 10 games”. BUT, you wouldn’t try to compare the counting stat with a rate stat for someone who was on a 40-HR pace over 130 games. That would be saying that one was on a 40-HR pace while the other hit 5 HR total. I don’t like it.
Well, um, actually a pretty nice little Saturday, we're going to go to Home Depot...buy some wallpaper, maybe get some flooring, stuff like that. Maybe Bed, Bath & Beyond, I don't know...I don't know if we'll have enough time.
by SagehenMacGyver47 on Dec 22, 2009 7:16 PM EST up reply actions
The data sample problem is more important than the scale problem
The problem here is only that he tried to compare someone with limited experience (77 innings) to someone with almost fives times more. You can’t draw any decent conclusions from that data sample, especially with a relatively crude state like UZR. Poker hands won are also a crude stat, and people make poor decisions based on small samples of hands all the time.
As far as the scale, I agree that whether you use the rate stat or the counting stat, they just need to be consistent. And always beware rate stats with a small sample.
Twitter: awolfson0
I Just Hope
GMDM quits while he’s behind and plants this guy in CF for 162 games.
I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.
Is there any way we might put together an
All Anderson Outfield? That would be cool. Kinda like having all lefties on your starting staff and slow third baseman.
StonewallPDS
Garret
Is an ex-Brave
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
by RoyalsRetro on Dec 22, 2009 4:41 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
But was he awesome in 2005?
"Now…put that in your [BLEEP]ing pipe and smoke it." -Hal McRae
"I was doing this when BJ was in his father's nutsack." -Renzo Gracie
by Sweep_the_Leg on Dec 22, 2009 4:42 PM EST up reply actions
The awesomest
283 .308 .435 .743
I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.
by philofthenorth on Dec 22, 2009 4:45 PM EST up reply actions
Nay
The BRAVEST
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
by RoyalsRetro on Dec 22, 2009 4:50 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
BTW--re hindsight bias
When you accurately predict a shitty outcome, that is not “hindsight bias.”
It is instead, to coin a new term based on use of advanced statistics to analyze baseball moves, “foresight bias.”
I humbly apologize, again, for any confusion in this area. Please feel free to reduce my year end bonus, if you must.
StonewallPDS
by StonewallPDS on Dec 22, 2009 4:45 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
I can live with that
"Shot by my own men."
by StonewallPDS on Dec 22, 2009 6:47 PM EST up reply actions
so
which White Sox player with an awful OPS+ are we gonna acquire next?
Brian Anderson: 69 OPS+, 78 OPS+ in 08/09
Josh Fields: 84 OPS+, 61 OPS+ in 08/09
Chris Getz: 74 OPS+
How much will it take for us to acquire Brent Lillibridge?
Ralph Wiggum would be a better GM than Dayton Moore
The first and third names on that list show the problem with evaluating players based on OPS+
Not that Anderson is great or anything.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Dec 22, 2009 4:51 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
I don't get the hate by...
…some Royals fans for Getz. He’s unproven at the ML level, but he exhibited talent all through the minors. I feel alone, at times, in thinking that Getz will be appreciated come October 2010. – TL
I don't know if there is much hate for Getz
I think most people liked the Teahen trade. The problem is that Getz plays a position where the Royals already have a pretty good player. And it’s not like Getz is a great young talent. He was a decent prospect who performed ok in the minors. And so far he hasn’t shown much of anything in the majors. But he has talent and still has upside potential. Unfortunately it appears that his shot to reach that potential (or not) will come at the expense of one of the Royals few pretty good players.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Dec 22, 2009 5:30 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
and maybe we're fed up with no-slug guys who can't even field all that well
i’m guessing Getz will be meh. not bad, not good. the real hope would be that his defense proves to be at the upper end of the projections, sort of like pulling WAR out of a hat.
Well, um, actually a pretty nice little Saturday, we're going to go to Home Depot...buy some wallpaper, maybe get some flooring, stuff like that. Maybe Bed, Bath & Beyond, I don't know...I don't know if we'll have enough time.
by SagehenMacGyver47 on Dec 22, 2009 6:50 PM EST up reply actions
A Bloomers/Getz platoon at 2B would be awesome
I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.
by philofthenorth on Dec 22, 2009 7:35 PM EST up reply actions
they're so good at 2B,
why not try them at 1B? Gload left some big shoes to fill.
Well, um, actually a pretty nice little Saturday, we're going to go to Home Depot...buy some wallpaper, maybe get some flooring, stuff like that. Maybe Bed, Bath & Beyond, I don't know...I don't know if we'll have enough time.
by SagehenMacGyver47 on Dec 23, 2009 12:25 PM EST up reply actions
I'd love for Royals fans
to be appreciating anyone in October.
Chaim Mattis Keller New York City's # 1 Royals fan!
by cmkeller on Dec 22, 2009 5:49 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
Getz is one of those guys
that’s actually worth a flyer, but shouldn’t be knocking off someone with value.
This space for rent.
Don't forget Wilson Betemit
53 OPS+ in 2009…and already signed (albeit to a minor-league deal).
"Now…put that in your [BLEEP]ing pipe and smoke it." -Hal McRae
"I was doing this when BJ was in his father's nutsack." -Renzo Gracie
by Sweep_the_Leg on Dec 22, 2009 4:52 PM EST up reply actions
Currency of Baseball
is Juan Uribe a free agent yet?
Ralph Wiggum would be a better GM than Dayton Moore
And also an ex-Brave
I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs.
Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Dec 23, 2009 10:55 PM EST up reply actions
It is deals like this that drive me towards the cliff
There is absolutely no noticeable upgrade in this signing, and it could be argued that it is a down-grade from last years team. I am about ready to dump my Royals fandom down the toilet like the six tall IPA’s I consumed immediately after reading this breaking news.
I am beginning to open the door to suggestions on a new team to root for. Thank you for the great early Christmas gift this year Dayton!! With all the money he has wasted on forgettable signings like this, the Royals could have made a splash and signed someone like . . . . ah hell, take your pick of the many ‘Type A’s’ out there.
There is absolutely no noticeable upgrade in this signing
He’s better than Maier.
BTW, feel free to dump your Royals fandom immediately if not sooner. If a bad GM causes you to jump ship, then it is time for you to join your rat brethren.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Dec 22, 2009 4:52 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
That is just the frustration in me
I could never quit this team. Plus being a royals fan already affords me the opportunity to be a fan of another team in october anyway.
Frustration makes sense
Dayton Moore’s actions breed frustration like crazy. Although this move really wasn’t bad. Of course he could and should have done better.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Dec 22, 2009 4:55 PM EST up reply actions
This offseason
actually has not been as big of a train wreck as some previous offseasons. I know the move wasn’t ‘that bad’. My frustration was that it was not ‘great’ or even ‘good’. It is sad that as royals fans we have to see moves like this, when there are players with much higher up-side, like Baldelli, that could basically be signed for the same contract as Anderson.
It is sad that as royals fans we have to see moves like this, when there are players with much higher up-side, like Baldelli, that could basically be signed for the same contract as Anderson.
Yeah, there is a list of better and also cheap OFers that Moore could and should have signed before Anderson. Some are as cheap as Anderson. Some are not. I don’t think Church or Baldelli would sign as cheaply as Anderson. We’ll see.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Dec 22, 2009 5:07 PM EST up reply actions
I Know He
Was just an example, but Baldelli has health concerns and probably can’t play full time. At this point I’d like to see BA in CF every day in 2010; what could it hurt? At least his defense is OK, and a .290 OBP is about par for this team. Remember when GMDM said that was going to be a priority?
I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.
by philofthenorth on Dec 22, 2009 5:09 PM EST up reply actions
Baldelli
unfortunately has some weird kind of syndrome that makes him unpredictably physically exhausted sometimes. Something like a migraine, apparently. I don’t believe it’s fully understood. He has all my sympathy and best wishes, but I don’t think we ought to sign him.
It's pronounced Poo-ZHOLS in Catalan.
It was an issue with mitochondria in his cells
But apparently it was misdiagnosed: http://www.abc6.com/sports/36277274.html
He now has something that is highly treatable. Should have taken a flier on him.
No, not positive
I hadn’t really broken down the numbers and projections. Just going from my recollection and some little snippets I’d read. Since the signing, the numbers I’ve seen don’t look good.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Dec 22, 2009 6:59 PM EST up reply actions
they look pretty damn similar to me
wOBA projection (James)
MM: .314
BA: .310
Career UZR/150
MM: -/-1.9
BA: 1.0
My questions are: is MITCH getting better in the field and starting to tap into the power he always had in the minors, and is Anderson starting to lose some range (best CF range factor in 2006, negative values in the time since)?
It’s probably all irrelevant b/c we’re comparing one slightly above replacement level player to another, but I like MITCH’s upside (though I haven’t seen Anderson play, so there’s that).
Well, um, actually a pretty nice little Saturday, we're going to go to Home Depot...buy some wallpaper, maybe get some flooring, stuff like that. Maybe Bed, Bath & Beyond, I don't know...I don't know if we'll have enough time.
by SagehenMacGyver47 on Dec 22, 2009 7:08 PM EST up reply actions
I prefer Mitch as well
His bat seems at least as good as Anderson and he has had much less time in the Major Leagues. Mitch’s sample size in center isn’t big enough to know much for certain yet, but I could see him playing defense as well as Anderson. They are basically the same age, too.
Another awesome platoon
I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.
by philofthenorth on Dec 22, 2009 7:38 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
if only we had a manager who understood that whole platooning thing.
"Things could always be worse." - Buddy Bell
When we are arguing over
whether Mitch or BA is the better starter, to perhaps hit 7th in front of last year’s lowest slugging pct. (Kendall), and last year’s lowest On base pct. (Yuni)- How big of a difference is it? It sucks either way.
Is it safe?
Projections
Ignore the “Bill James” projection. Bill James lends his name to it, but it has nothing to do with him. And it hasn’t ever been particularly accurate. CHONE and ZiPS have been much more accurate. And on those projections, Maier looks to be better than Anderson. Only CHONE projects defense and it augments the MLB data (which is limited for both) with TotalZone defensive data from the minors. And it projects Maier to be better than Anderson defensively as well.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Dec 22, 2009 7:56 PM EST up reply actions
i know 'James' seems to overstate
but i figure they’re probably overstated similarly
Well, um, actually a pretty nice little Saturday, we're going to go to Home Depot...buy some wallpaper, maybe get some flooring, stuff like that. Maybe Bed, Bath & Beyond, I don't know...I don't know if we'll have enough time.
by SagehenMacGyver47 on Dec 23, 2009 12:43 PM EST up reply actions
I think Mitch was actually starting to put it together
and learning how to hit MLB pitching later in the season. He’s the sort of player you go ahead and give a serious shot to when you’re a team like this, because, you know, you already have him and he’s making minimum wage.
This space for rent.
Ya agreed
if he could just duplicate his Second Half OPS of .708 to go with his defense he would have to be a somewhat valuable centerfielder.
I don't know how to put this but I'm kind of a big deal.
FWIW
I think Maier is better (but not by a whole lot or anything)
Mr Glass, this is a pro sports team, not a retail store - run it like one!
Are you telling me
that I can’t decide I may as well just watch the Rangers for free this year instead of paying extra to watch the Royals?
This space for rent.
This team is not downgraded
MIke Jacobs and John Bale were released
by GobbleforCyoung on Dec 22, 2009 8:13 PM EST up reply actions
Oh and you should root for the Orioles
They drafted the players we should have (Brandon Snyder, Brian Matusz, Matt Wieters)
by GobbleforCyoung on Dec 22, 2009 8:19 PM EST up reply actions
Root for the UMKC Roos
If you must.
StonewallPDS
I Always Root
For Roos.
I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.
by philofthenorth on Dec 22, 2009 5:10 PM EST up reply actions
Go Oletangy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1111111111111
I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.
by philofthenorth on Dec 22, 2009 10:49 PM EST up reply actions
I was there the year they barely missed the NCAA tournament
That was frustrating.
$700k
per Rosenthal
http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/121409-Latest-MLB-buzz
"Greinke and the Brain" (R) (C) TM
by SittinByTheFoulPole on Dec 22, 2009 5:12 PM EST reply actions
That's too much
Not a huge number, but still more than he should have paid for Anderson, especially given the many other alternatives.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Dec 22, 2009 5:13 PM EST up reply actions
Something at the $600K level or less would be fine with me. I mean he’s unexciting, but decent. And when you’re talking about money well under the $1M level, you’re talking about peanuts.
did you literally just change your mind within 50 minutes?
baseball rules.
Flip-flopper! Flip-flopper!!!11
"Now…put that in your [BLEEP]ing pipe and smoke it." -Hal McRae
"I was doing this when BJ was in his father's nutsack." -Renzo Gracie
by Sweep_the_Leg on Dec 22, 2009 5:58 PM EST up reply actions
Do you literally not see that $700K is not “at the $600K level or less”? What part of that do you not understand?
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Dec 22, 2009 6:25 PM EST up reply actions
I think his view is that there isn't much difference in 100,000 dollars
Bump that up by factors of 10 and it gets much worse. Not terrible, but I have to wonder why we need BA at all?
Not terrible
But my point was that he’s a guy who is probably worth about $400K. So I wouldn’t have been upset by as much as $600K. But that was my ceiling. And that still would have been more than he’s worth. And then Moore goes out and gives him even more than that. It’s too much. No that amount of money isn’t a big deal. The magnitude of this mistake is not large. But it is a mistake nonetheless (both in terms of personnel and dollars).
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Dec 22, 2009 8:00 PM EST up reply actions
but hey...
when its December 22nd, and you’re 3 months from ST and 90% of the FAs out there haven’t signed
you've got to overpay
these guys would rather sit at home than
play for the Royals — Need To Overpay
Well, um, actually a pretty nice little Saturday, we're going to go to Home Depot...buy some wallpaper, maybe get some flooring, stuff like that. Maybe Bed, Bath & Beyond, I don't know...I don't know if we'll have enough time.
by SagehenMacGyver47 on Dec 23, 2009 12:44 PM EST up reply actions
There are dozens of guys we could sign for good value
But that doesn’t mean we should actually sign all of them. The fact that BA signed for more than the value we think he has is not as important as the fact that the Royals only have a finite amount of money and roster spots, and those commodities need to be optimized. BA at the minimum would be a “good value,” but that’s a roster spot we can’t give to a younger player with more potential, or even a Mitch Maier, and it’s money we can’t give to anyone else.
Twitter: awolfson0
Well, back to disagreeing.
When you step back and consider all the money that flies around MLB, then quibbling over $100K is, well, pedantic. It’s not a mistake. – TL
“Are you being sarcastic, dude?” “I don’t even know anymore.”
Well, um, actually a pretty nice little Saturday, we're going to go to Home Depot...buy some wallpaper, maybe get some flooring, stuff like that. Maybe Bed, Bath & Beyond, I don't know...I don't know if we'll have enough time.
by SagehenMacGyver47 on Dec 23, 2009 12:46 PM EST up reply actions
Well, I guess we should have known
the Royals have to overpay for top talent!!
by Mac'n'Seitz on Dec 22, 2009 11:17 PM EST up reply actions
ZIPS and CHONE project Anderson as roughly replacement level
ZIPS: 238/301/372
CHONE: 236/306/378
With regular playing time and rounding up a little, that equates to about -20 runs below average. Assuming he is average in CF, he ends up something like 0.2-0.3 WAR (+20 runs for replacement – 20 runs for offense +0 for defense +2.5 for positional adjustment).
Anderson is one of the player over whom Mitch Maier should actually start.
This is yet another example of tools trumping performance. The DM front office looks ONLY at tools. If their scouts like a player’s speed, body, bat speed, etc., then that is all that matters. Past performance is irrelevant.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Dec 22, 2009 5:40 PM EST up reply actions
$100K in incentives
hope he gets a good bonus for a Silver Slugger award and/or a World Series MVP prize
Ralph Wiggum would be a better GM than Dayton Moore
For 700K
I can live with it. I think Maier is better and is home grown talent, but $700K for someone to push him is OK. Given Guillen’s poor range in right field, the Royals need to load up on Center Fielders to cover more ground and to be late inning defensive replacements for Jose.
by Valcour on Dec 22, 2009 7:31 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
Seriously, A Bench
Of Pena, Getz/Bloomers, Maier/Anderson and Fields would be a step up from last year, and might indicate Hillman and Moore now understand R/L platoons.
I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.
by philofthenorth on Dec 22, 2009 7:46 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
yeah true
If Guillen takes a day off, Kila plays first and Callaspo DH’s we can have mad lefties in the lineup
by GobbleforCyoung on Dec 22, 2009 8:35 PM EST up reply actions
We Need To
Play Butler and Gordon no matter who’s pitching. With offensive help from the farm so far away, any near term success depends on them becoming good, if not great, every day players.
I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.
by philofthenorth on Dec 22, 2009 9:04 PM EST up reply actions
Butler's already good
I think seeing him go to great is a better bet than seeing Alex go to good, unfortunately. But that’s just my feeling.
Twitter: awolfson0
except that Gordon...
is probably still the better all around player right now, and will be going forward unless his defense tanks
butler is a better hitter, but the gap isn’t that huge, at least right now
gordon plays a more difficult position, and is not bad defensively, while butler is one of the worst defensive 1Bs in the AL
factor in baserunning, and I think gordon’s more valuable, overall
now if Butler takes another step as a hitter, its a different discussion
I agree with you
I just wondered why Gobble doesn’t. He didn’t explain.
by kcbottom9th on Dec 23, 2009 12:16 AM EST up reply actions
right now
Gordon barely had an OPS above .700. Yeah he was hurt, but its not like he hit well in 2008 either. He could draw a walk well. I checked the stats, Gordon has negative UZR in 2008 AND 2009! If Butler is so bad at first, put him at DH anyhow.
by GobbleforCyoung on Dec 23, 2009 12:25 AM EST up reply actions
Someone put a poll vote up!
I want to know who is a better player. Strictly a better baseball player. Lets not get into salary, arbitration years, age, injuries, etc.
Who will be better player in 2010?
Oh, who cares if 3b is more difficult to play. Its NOT more difficult to find 3B in MLB. There ARE as many people who can play 3B as 1B. KC, it seems like you wanted to say Gordon is a better athlete than Butler, if that was your point then fine, but it renders that point mute.
by GobbleforCyoung on Dec 23, 2009 12:31 AM EST up reply actions
Yikes
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Dec 23, 2009 12:33 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
yeah ok
Just because its a more difficult position, you can’t necessarily compare them. You compare players of similar positions in that sense.
Do you give credit to Betancourt for playing SS, the hardest infield position when comparing to him to an outfielder/pitcher? No, you look at other SS.
All I’m saying is Gordon has had a negative UZR the past two seasons. If everyone here values sabermetrics to the extent they do, there is no backtracking here. Butler is worse as a 1B than a Gordon is at 3B, but his bat more than makes up for it, unless Gordon can throw up an 800 OPS, then I will revise.
by GobbleforCyoung on Dec 23, 2009 3:38 AM EST up reply actions
Yikes
Just because its a more difficult position, you can’t necessarily compare them. You compare players of similar positions in that sense.
You should recognize positional differences and relative scarcity.
All I’m saying is Gordon has had a negative UZR the past two seasons. If everyone here values sabermetrics to the extent they do, there is no backtracking here.
Yes, we value sabermetrics. But unlike you, we attempt to use the stats well and not in the half-assed way you are using them. You refer to his past two seasons of UZR. First, two seasons of defensive data are the equivalent of about 4 months of hitting stats. Second, the second of the two seasons of data you referenced isn’t even near a full season. He only played 49 games at third in 2009. So, let’s look at what amounts to a decent sample of defensive data, which is the less than 3 seasons Gordon has played at 3B in the majors. Over that sample, his UZR/150 is +1.4. That data, augmented by his TotalZone defensive data from the minors is why Gordon projects to be at least an average defensive 3B in 2010. And, of course, he projects to be an above average hitter for the position.
unless Gordon can throw up an 800 OPS, then I will revise.
You give Butler too much credit, Gordon way too little (ignoring positional differences) and your focus on OPS ignores the value of Gordon’s fairly high projected OBP.
In short, your anti-Gordon blatherings are, as usual, baseless.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Dec 23, 2009 8:28 AM EST up reply actions
You just do the opposite
and are clearly biased towards Gordon. Minor league defensive ratings are irrelevant. Don’t use them because no one cares. Gordon has been in the majors 3 years now. And I like how you revised that Gordon will be “atleast” average, when the original poster said he would be “above” average. That is the point I’m refuting. I love how you are using “projections” to give Gordon credit for having a high OBP, making him, once again, “above” average for some unknown reason.
There is absolutely no reason to believe that he will improve on his 2008 numbers. He will be 26 when spring training starts, Butler will still only be 23.
You do realize that not one Royals in over a decade has had a higher OPS than Butler (min 150 games)
Stop with the positional argument. It doesn’t matter that Butler can’t play 3B. Compare him 1B, and Gordon to 3B. There are just as many replacement level 3B available as 1B. And there are plenty of above replacement level 3B available. Look at Glaus, Beltre, Lowell, Atkins, Crede, Derosa, Feliz, and so on.
by GobbleforCyoung on Dec 23, 2009 1:30 PM EST up reply actions
NY
if you are going to argue that 4 months of hitting stats is equivalent to two years of hitting data (which sounds fine to me), how about I talk about how Butler has the “potential” or perhaps will be “projected” to be an average first basemen. He could be working hard this offseason. See, it’ futile.
Without taking into account age, salary, arbitration, etc, Butler is a better player. It’s close, because Gordon is a better defender, can run the bases and can still have a good OBP, but he’s 3 years older and a lesser player. Sorry.
by GobbleforCyoung on Dec 23, 2009 1:35 PM EST up reply actions
I’m not taking a position in the “who is better, Gordon or Butler?” issue. I’m just pointing out the flaws in your analysis of Gordon, and these are flaws that you always make about him. You’ve decided that he stinks and you won’t let any facts get in the way. Look at the stats. Look at the projections. You’re wrong about Gordon, as always.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Dec 23, 2009 1:50 PM EST up reply actions
No I don't believe the hype that all of you have completely invested in.
Of course I want him to be a good player. I see the likes of Ryan Braun, Evan Longoria, Justin Upton, and Gordon was supposed to be at that level.
Is it fair to judge him based on that criteria. Probably not, but it’s just difficult to argue that Gordon is a better baseball player than Butler after the 2009 season as royalsreview asserted.
90% of GM’s would offer more in a package of prospects for Butler than Gordon. But if you asked them after 2008, 90% would favor Gordon.
Gordon had a really bad year. He was injured half the year, but was terrible when he returned. And if defensive ratings are not sufficient enough to judge either yet, Butler was a better hitter in 2009, at a younger age, than Gordon was in 2008.
by GobbleforCyoung on Dec 23, 2009 1:59 PM EST up reply actions
No I don’t believe the hype that all of you have completely invested in.
Does “hype” factor into statistical projections? If so, tell me how.
it’s just difficult to argue that Gordon is a better baseball player than Butler after the 2009 season as royalsreview asserted.
Evaluating any player based on one season alone is a really bad idea. I would hope that would be obvious to anyone.
And if defensive ratings are not sufficient enough to judge either yet,
I didn’t say that Gordon’s defensive numbers so far are too small of a sample to tell us anything. What I said was looking at his defensive numbers solely from an injury-shortened 2009 season made no sense whatsoever. But if you look at the largest MLB sample we have (his entire MLB career, spanning three seasons), then you have an above average defensive 3B.
Butler was a better hitter in 2009, at a younger age, than Gordon was in 2008.
Yes, that counts for a lot. And, as I said in my post above, I’m not taking a position in the Butler vs. Gordon debate. Good points can be made on both sides. I was just pointing out the many glaring flaws in your analysis of Gordon. You continue to ignore positional adjustment…and defense…and projections.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Dec 23, 2009 2:38 PM EST up reply actions
fair
hope for the royals sake you prove me wrong
by GobbleforCyoung on Dec 23, 2009 2:56 PM EST up reply actions
Well at least you didn't call it a "moo" point
but it renders that point mute
by AxDxMx on Dec 23, 2009 2:53 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
you left no room on the bench for Aviles
Mr Glass, this is a pro sports team, not a retail store - run it like one!
I Addressed That
In a post below. I’d really like to see an Aviles/Getz platoon at 2B with Aviles getting time at SS and 3B. With the CF platoon and Fields we don’t need another OF option, so we could say goodbye to Sporqie. I just don’t think it will happen.
Actually, I’d rather see Aviles at SS with Yu-Bet on the bench or gone, but I’m pretty sure that won’t happen either. The other possibility is a 5 man bench, but Hillman thinks he needs a dozen pitchers.
I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.
by philofthenorth on Dec 23, 2009 2:19 PM EST up reply actions
This is one of the best comments on this post.
The signing of B. Anderson is about creating competition. No one should rush to any conclusion that either Maier or Anderson WILL win the CF job. They’re going to spring training to see who’s healthy, who bats best (park adjusted), and who fields best. We need competition at every single position—-whether for Butler, Gordon, Kendall, or Getz. We need depth, and the signing of Anderson helps in that regard. – TL
Cleveland had competition for their QB position this year
Would you say Derek Anderson and Brady Quinn helped each other through competition, or their production was better because of the competition?
I sure wouldn’t.
Are you suggesting that the Royals make the decision based on Spring Training performance?
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Dec 23, 2009 4:57 PM EST up reply actions
No, I Think
It has more to do with reading the Bible.
I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.
by philofthenorth on Dec 23, 2009 5:07 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
Why not?
That's worked so well for them in the past.
Mr Glass, this is a pro sports team, not a retail store - run it like one!
They've tried this very thing every ST
So let’s stick with failed traditions? I think not.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Dec 23, 2009 8:19 PM EST up reply actions
If it's competition you want, you could have had that with some generic CFer from AAA or AA
This competition will cost $700k, which is $300k more than the minor leaguer costs if he wins the job, and $700k more over what you owe Mitch if Mitch wins the job.
I’m not saying competition isn’t good. I’m saying that’s a dumb reason to like this move.
Does the move give us more depth? Sure, if you think depth means “generic player with a bad bat”.
Did B. Anderson steal...
…your girlfriend or something? It’s really not a huge stretch to say that he could develop into something more than he’s shown. Ozzie Guillen is decidedly not a great manager of young talent—-or at least he hasn’t shown the patience for it in Chicago. – TL
No, I actually don't think this is horrible, but there were better players for the money than BA.
And my argument isn’t against BA, it’s against the reasons you stated for liking the move.
i was someone who said "it's just going to be a minor league deal"
i saw the name and the stat line and confused him with josh anderson.
Well, its not a bad move if Anderson takes the spot of...
Bloomquist.
Go Royals!
Will not happen
Ted F-ing Williams of the MFL would not take Bloomquist’s spot on this roster.
by Black and Gold on Dec 22, 2009 8:59 PM EST up reply actions
His versatility is too valuable
I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.
by philofthenorth on Dec 22, 2009 9:00 PM EST up reply actions
Most occupants of KC's roster
suck at only one position, or maybe two. Bloomy sucks at 5 different positions, if not more. That gives Hillman unlimited lineup options.
by Black and Gold on Dec 22, 2009 9:08 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
Yeah, If Yu-Bet
Has to play I’d rather see Aviles platooning with Getz than Bloomers, but I don’t see that happening. If we keep Maier and Anderson as a CF platoon it wouldn’t matter that Aviles doesn’t play OF, and he’s better than Bloomers at all the IF positions.
I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.
by philofthenorth on Dec 22, 2009 9:18 PM EST up reply actions
whatever, who gives a fuck about the salary
Maybe Moore just likes to overpay. He’s generous. That way, the players will be on his side.
These useless players don’t factor into the Royals success. Its dependent on our potential offensive stars. Moustakas and Hosmer are struggling so lets not even get into that. Atleast Duffy/Montgomery are on the right track for 2011. Hopefully one of the Gordon/Fields pans out. Atleast Butler is looking pretty good.
by GobbleforCyoung on Dec 22, 2009 8:28 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
Have I entered a Mobius Strip?
I feel like these are the same sort of comments and justifications we heard re: the signings of similar replacement-level luminaries from the ‘06, ’07’ seasons etc. “They’re just filler until our core gets ready to compete…”
Not sayin’; just sayin’….
by Yunielateral Movement on Dec 23, 2009 10:07 AM EST up reply actions
Haven't read the other comments yet
Major league deal?? WTF?!?
On the bright side….(hopefully) no Scotty Pods
Unless I'm wrong...
My Twitter feed
To add....
I think this move is indicative of one of Dayton’s largest weaknesses on the free agent market. He’s like a kid who just got some money for his birthday — he’s got to do something. Rather than wait out the market and picking from the best of the available players, he overpays early and promises a 25-man roster spot to someone who really shouldn’t get it.
Unless I'm wrong...
My Twitter feed
Maybe we can cut back on his sugar intake
and he’ll start making better decisions?
by hunter s. royal on Dec 23, 2009 12:07 AM EST up reply actions
For some reason
I was thinking that Brian Anderson had a good year once. I just checked his career stats. I was wrong. He hits like Gathright, steals bases like DeJesus, gets on base like Olivo and throws like Crisp. I assume he can at least catch a fly ball, but since that does not seem to be a requirement for being a KC outfielder, I’m starting to wonder about that, too.
Ugh.
by Black and Gold on Dec 23, 2009 12:24 AM EST reply actions
In fairness
He had a really good year in my DMB league last year.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
"B Anderson reaches deal with Royals"...
is the headline i see with the newsfeed from royals.com. That speaks volumes. Not “the royals add a player to the outfield mix”. or “royals sign another guy named anderson”.
I’m no english major, but the fact that Anderson is the subject of the sentence, not the team implies that HE is the one that made the good deall. “anderson actually gets a major league contract”
Royals SLG compared with Yankees OBP
If Anderson (B.) were to start in center and Getz were to start at 2B, as wild as those assumptions may be, here’s a side-by-side of (1) the slugging percentages of the Royals’ 5-9 hitters (based on last year’s stats) with (2) the on base percentages of the Yankees’ 5-9 hitters:
Royals SLG, 5 through 9:
.370
.367
.350
.347
.305
Yankees’ OPB, 5 through 9 (Granderson is slotted at #8, but you can swap him out for Nick Johnson if you prefer, which makes the comparison more hilarious, given his .426 obp):
.365
.371
.352
.327
.363
So if you were to slide the Yankee’s obp one spot to the right in the triple slash, they’d still outslug the Royals. Awesome.
*You think I'm good* "You know, that Farnsworth is pretty good." *You will give me 9 million dollars* "So, Farnsy, how does $9 million sound?"
by jackie ballgame on Dec 23, 2009 11:49 AM EST reply actions
But I'm sure that the Yankeees slugging
is about the same as the Royals OBP. Right?
by Black and Gold on Dec 23, 2009 2:48 PM EST up reply actions
Prepare to have the horse exhumed
B/ Anderson, probably about a ~0.5 WAr player for a team desparate enough to play him for 150 games, will make $700,000 for the Royals, and will probably compete with Mitch “MITCH” Maier (a 1-1.5 WAR player/150 making the minimum) for playing time. A possible platoon?
Ryan Langerhans, who is older, but far superior, at 1.5-2 WAR/150, will make $525,000 for the Mariners this season, and will be their 4th OF.
I’m sure Langerhans couldn’t have been lured to KC for an extra $100,000 anda chance to start in CF or RF.
I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs.
Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.
Oddly, In Very
Small sample sizes both Maier and Anderson have reverse splits. These would probably normalize in time, but it is ironic. Of course, Hillman would not know this.
I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.
by philofthenorth on Dec 24, 2009 3:03 PM EST up reply actions
What about Mahay?
He originally came up with the Red Sox as an outfielder. Maybe we can get him back & reconvert him! Too bad TPJ is gone, how cool would that be to have him on the mound & mahay providing sucky fielding behind him!
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Does Billy Beane’s contract extension signal an optimistic dawn for Oakland fans?
- Ask Alex: Will Alex Avila be an All-Star again?
- Create-a-Caption: Matt Cain’s great pair of golf pants
- Kim Kardashian, Kris Humphries autographed ball being auctioned by Twins
- George Brett lawsuit claims his company falsely advertises ion necklaces’ health benefits
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.
