The Pre-Arbitration Eligible Position Player Roster

I post this not as a shameless blog entry, but I've been really looking forward to posting this at RR and (hopefully) generating some discussion. What are the chances a hypothetical position-player element of the roster actually *outperforms* our current position players? In other words, how many wins and losses would the current 13 men produce over our *actual* likely 13 men to make up the position player element of our Opening Day 2009 25-man roster? (Assume we have Greinke, Meche, etc. etc. on the pitching staff).

Lineup:
C - Brayan Pena
1B - Ryan Shealy
2B - Alberto Callaspo
SS - Mike Aviles
3B - Alex Gordon
LF - Chris Lubanski
CF - Mitch Maier
RF - Shane Costa
DH - Billy Butler

Bench:
C - J.R. House
1B/DH - Kila Ka'aihue
2B - Tug Hulett
UT - Tommy Murphy

I didn't include bench players in my original post, so I may modify it upon later notice. I really feel this is an extremely relevant topic for RR. We all know Moore hasn't exactly done an exemplary job implementing payroll efficiency with keen understanding in what constitutes 'replacement' value. CHONE and PECOTA project 71 and 76 wins, respectively, for the "actual" roster. Is this roster really much, much worse?

7 months ago Royals Nation 29 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

hmmmm.... off the top of my head

Pena might be a decent hitter, but he gives a lot away on defense, according to what I hear

Shealy = Jacobs

Callspo is better than Tug, they are both better than Bloomquist

Aviles is the best SS, obviously

GOrdon is better than whomever

Lubanski is by all accounts horrible at this point

MITCH isn’t close to DDJ or Crisp, but even average defense in CF makes him probably more valuable (straight up) than Guillen.

Same for Costa.

I think the “real” roster is better, but not that much better.

Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary to Driveline Mechanics and elsewhere since sometime in 2008.

by devil_fingers on Mar 25, 2009 12:14 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Right

And just to clarify, Callaspo, Aviles, Gordon, and Butler still make the hypothetical roster. Just clearing that up.

Get treated. Royally.

by Royals Nation on Mar 25, 2009 12:17 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I Still don't see people's arguments that Shealy=Jacobs

Shealy=Butler. If either Butler or Shealy ever produces at a level even equal to Jacobs (not implying that that is a really high level) then you can say that. But Shealy is the player that has failed to secure the first base job on the Royals over Gload the last two years. So, until shown otherwise, Shealy<Gload.

by Chyladin on Mar 25, 2009 2:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

2008 WAR

Ryan Shealy: 0.7

Mike Jacobs: 0.1

Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary to Driveline Mechanics and elsewhere since sometime in 2008.

by devil_fingers on Mar 25, 2009 2:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Here are what Ryan Shealy’s numbers would have looked like had he spent the entire year in K.C. (in ’08). I calculated MiLB Equivalency and simply added his actual September numbers to the total.

.251/.324/.439

Now compare that trio to that of Jacobs ’08, park/league adjusted:

.255/.309/.529

Anyone want to do a wOBA calculation? My guess is that the 15-point OBP difference wouldn’t outweight the 90-point SLG difference. (Using the Bill James basic rule that OBP is 4 times more important than SLG). Consider, though, that Jacobs has a -21 career total zone whereas Shealy has a +1. That’s enough to at least make the two comparable.

By the way, d_f, wasn’t Jacobs’ WAR -1.0 in ’08? 0.1 is his career total.

Get treated. Royally.

by Royals Nation on Mar 25, 2009 3:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I won't argue with the numbers/projections

. . . mostly because I am still a Saber-nubile. ( I do know what WAR). I can read the numbers, I can’t produce them yet. I think this is a situation where scouting/production needs to inform the situation though. Whether Shealy projects to be better or equal to Jacobs this season could be argued persuasively through the numbers. The fact that the Royals have seen Shealy first hand for more than two years and came to the conclusion that they think Jacobs is the better player is why I lean toward Jacobs. I ( and more unfortunately, the Royals) could be wrong.

Now, maybe the Royals should start the season with Jacobs and call up Shealy. If my memory serves we well, Shealy hit the ball well in the second half of 2006 and in August of last year. He was TPJ bad in 2007 when he was the starting 1st baseman and he couldn’t beat out Gload to start 2008. They should just fully embrace his abilities as a second half player.

by Chyladin on Mar 25, 2009 4:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I was using fangraphs rather than Rally's numbers

Trying to be generous

Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary to Driveline Mechanics and elsewhere since sometime in 2008.

by devil_fingers on Mar 25, 2009 7:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Man...

that outfield would be absolutely atrocious. At least offensively. There’s a reason none of those guys have spent any significant time in KC. To me, that would be the biggest difference.

Why no Teahen? Plugging him into Lubanski’s spot would up the offense considerably without sacrificing much, if anything, on defense.

"Now…put that in your [BLEEP]ing pipe and smoke it." -Hal McRae

by Sweep_the_Leg on Mar 25, 2009 12:27 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Teahen has already entered his arbitration years. The hypothetical roster was pre-arbitration guys, only. (Essentially, the $400+K men) +meaning additional little bonuses and incentives (or courteous gestures) that the team gives along the way, without actually going into arbitration.

Get treated. Royally.

by Royals Nation on Mar 25, 2009 12:30 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I wonder if you switched, say, Lubanski with Duarte

you might as well try to go with all defense, since the O would be bad

by royalsreview on Mar 25, 2009 12:56 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Ah yes...

that’s what I get for merely skimming the post and posting through yawns at 11:30 PM.

"Now…put that in your [BLEEP]ing pipe and smoke it." -Hal McRae

by Sweep_the_Leg on Mar 25, 2009 10:30 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

The IF and catching looks pretty good

The OF would be a (hopefully) replacement level mess.

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Mar 25, 2009 3:52 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I actually like Maier

It’s extremely unlikely he would outperform any of the four guys expected to make the roster for the outfield (except maybe Guillen?), but he’s definitely a good defensive option, and he’s not terribly hacky at the plate.

He has had a significant increase in SLG this spring which doesn’t seem to be entirely batting average-dependent, so maybe he’s turned a corner there. He’s at least the right age for it.

by marbotty on Mar 25, 2009 9:28 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

It’s extremely unlikely he would outperform any of the four guys expected to make the roster for the outfield (except maybe Guillen?)

Let’s not forget that hitting counts. And it’s not like Guillen is a replacement level hitter.

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Mar 25, 2009 2:00 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

TANSTARLHOFORLP

(There Are No Such Things As Replacement Level Hitters Or Fielders Only Replacement Level Players. Heh)

Averaging CHONE, PECOTA, and ZiPS, and using CHONE’s defensive numbers Maier is -4 in CF< I think; Costa I’ve assumed as average, as we don’t have any good data), here are the WARs I get for all three over 150 games:

Maier: 0.9
Guillen: 0.3
Costa: 1.1

And PECOTA hates Costa and Maier even more than the other systems. Even if you think the projections are overly optimistic, are they 8 runs optimistic?

Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary to Driveline Mechanics and elsewhere since sometime in 2008.

by devil_fingers on Mar 25, 2009 2:46 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Even if you think the projections are overly optimistic, are they 8 runs optimistic?

As I think they are both roughly replacement level AAAA players (or just pretty good AAA player, in the case of Maier), then yes I do think they are optimistic by 8 runs or more. It is difficult to accurately project players with little major league data.

BTW, I bet Guillen ends the season closer to 1 WAR than 0.3 WAR. (Gut!)

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Mar 25, 2009 4:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I said it before

But I think the Royals might be a better team if Dayton had done absolutely nothing this off-season.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Mar 25, 2009 9:24 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

you, sir, are correct

by marbotty on Mar 25, 2009 9:29 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I basically agree

I think the team might be about the same, overall (maybe), but this steam is older and more expensive. It’s sort of like the Rays plan to jump into contention, except in reverse.

Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary to Driveline Mechanics and elsewhere since sometime in 2008.

by devil_fingers on Mar 25, 2009 9:48 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs