Guillen instead of Fukudome - I still hate it.
I just can't seem to let this go. I really think Dayton Moore made a very poor decision in pursuing Guillen while showing little interest in Fukudome. I have no way of knowing if Fukudome would have signed with the Royals for the same money he accepted from the Cubs, but had the Royals shown him the same love they showed Guillen, things might have worked out differently.
Fukudome and Guillen both signed for $12M per year. Fukudome for four years, Guillen for three years. Fukudome is one year younger than Guillen.
According to 2008 ZiPS predictions:
Fukudome .293/.382/.460
Guillen .262/.327/.432
Fukudome is by all accounts an excellent RF, possibly even gold glove caliber. Guillen is not bad, a bit above average.
Guillen will be suspended for the first 15 games of next year because of his use of performance enhancing drugs. If he goes off the juice we have to assume his performance will decline.
Guillen has a long history as being a difficult player to deal with. The Reds traded Guillen to the A's in 2003 after Guillen objected to being benched in favor or Ken Griffey Jr. when the future hall of famer returned from injury. Even though Guillen had a very good season the A's did not attempt to re-sign him. Reportedly several Oakland players asked management specifically to not to bring Guillen back because of the negative attitude he brought into the clubhouse. Guillen was signed by the Angels for a bargain rate in 2004. Once again he had a very good year yet the Angels still felt compelled to suspend him for the last week of the season and the post-season because he just didn't seem able to control his destructive behavior. Imagine, a team suspending a key player (Guillen hit 27 home runs and drove in 104 RBIs that season) just before the playoffs because he was just that big of an ass. It had to be pretty bad. I know that you don't build a winning roster around boy-scouts, but Guillen seems to be a serious problem case. Guillen has played for seven teams in the last eight years. This is not a coincidence.
Across the board Fukudome comes out the far superior player. The only reason Moore has ever offered as to why he fixated on Guillen while not having much interest in Fukudome is that Guillen is a right handed hitter while Fukudome is a lefty, and Moore felt the line-up could use more help from the right side. I find these efforts by Moore to micromanage the line-up in December unrealistic and short-sighted. You sign the best players, you don't play in-game strategy when signing free agents to multi year contracts in the middle of winter.
This diary serves no productive purpose at all. I just wanted to vent one more time about what I think was a poor decision by a man who I think is very astute in his overall judgment. I hope this diary comes back to haunt me, but somehow I don't expect that will happen. I'll still cheer for Guillen while he is wearing Royal blue, I just wish Moore had given us a player somewhat easier to embrace.
0 recs |
151
comments
Comments
No huge Guillen guy either...
by royalsreview on Jan 9, 2008 10:16 PM EST 0 recs
That is true,
This off-season I was looking at the outfielders who would be available for about $10M a year and I thought Fukudome was the best out there. And of the others (Rowand, Jenkins & Hunter) Guillen was the only one who I actively did not want. So it worked out as badly as it could from my perspective.
by James Quinn on
Jan 9, 2008 10:30 PM EST
up
0 recs
I thought Bradley would be a good choice
On the negative side, he's got the same sort of injury and behavioral issues that plague Guillen. Still, I'd rather have him for one year, with perhaps a team option for a second, than 3 years for Guillen. It would also free up a lot of funds to go after someone like Dunn next year, rather than likely preclude us from making a run.
by marbotty on
Jan 10, 2008 4:23 AM EST
up
0 recs
Injury and money
With regard to money, I don't think Guillen's contract is going to preclude us from going after someone like Dunn or another top tier FA next year. The money is there, and I think Glass is willing to spend it. We will be able to afford one top tier FA. If that means Dunn at 5/90, I'm all for it. If that means Dunn at 5/100 or 6/110, I'd pass. There are many other good FA's to go after if the bidding on Dunn gets really, really crazy, or if we would have to significantly over-bet the pot to get him.
by NYRoyal on
Jan 10, 2008 4:30 AM EST
up
0 recs
I liked Bradley also,
I think the difference here might be between a guy with a psychological dysfunction and a garden variety ass.
Not like I really know these guys.
by James Quinn on
Jan 10, 2008 10:14 AM EST
up
0 recs
HGH
So I don't think there is good reason to assume that HGH helped Guillen. Therefore we shouldn't expect him to come down off this non-existent HGH benefit.
Across the board Fukudome comes out the far superior player.
We have no idea if this is true. We have no idea how his skills will translate to MLB. No one knows. And yet you are still somehow certain of how he'll perform in the majors. Were you certain how Kaz Matsui was going to perform? How do you know he'll be more like Ichiro than K. Matsui? I guess I couldn't resist dealing with your undying Fukudome fetish a little.
by NYRoyal on Jan 9, 2008 10:50 PM EST 0 recs
I do not have a crystal ball,
I'll read more on HGH, but according to players, the stuff works.
by James Quinn on
Jan 9, 2008 11:41 PM EST
up
0 recs
Information
What information do you have which makes this "clear cut?" I like Zips to some degree and PECOTA and similar projection systems but for Japanese players they are woefully inadequate. Zips and PECOTA has many years of data for thousands of players going from one year of MLB service to another or from the minors to MLB. That gives them solid ground on which to make projections.
However, only a handful of Japanese position players have come to MLB with varying degrees of success and failure. So there is little data from which one can make a projection. And no one should feel confident about the accuracy of such projections.
But yet you think it is "clear cut." Why? What information am I missing? It seems like this is just a gut feeling for you.
by NYRoyal on
Jan 9, 2008 11:46 PM EST
up
0 recs
You see my case above.
With time we will see who is right.
by James Quinn on
Jan 10, 2008 12:03 AM EST
up
0 recs
So your case is Japanese stats
by NYRoyal on
Jan 10, 2008 12:08 AM EST
up
0 recs
You know, I just did look at Doolittle's article
And really, Doolittle is kinda on his own crusade here. Most people think HGH does help. Clearly the players, international doping organizations and all professional sporting leagues think it helps. That is why it is banned.
I could learn more but as of now I continue to see HGH is a PED and will until I see something more convincing than what is highlighted here.
by James Quinn on
Jan 9, 2008 11:59 PM EST
up
0 recs
I don't like PED's anymore than you do
As far as "how HGH is used by athletes," how do athletes use HGH? They certainly don't use massive doses. If they did, you would see very evident facial acromegaly. I haven't seen any evidence of acromegaly on any baseball player and certainly not Guillen.
Long story short, there is little reason to believe HGH significantly helped Guillen and that we should now see a significant dropoff in his performance.
by NYRoyal on
Jan 10, 2008 12:13 AM EST
up
0 recs
without any evidence...
If the studies don't show an improvement, they probably aren't taking into account the benefit of remaining at peak. Uh, I didn't read the studies, though.
by stuckinstl12 on
Jan 10, 2008 2:04 AM EST
up
0 recs
I recall reading an article in Esquire or GQ
I think they specifically looked at two doctors, both of whom were in their sixties or seventies, and both of whom the magazine interviewed and photographed.
The most remarkable aspect of the article were the pictures themselves of the reserachers. From the neck up, they looked like Grandpa. From the neck down, they looked like Arnold Schwarzenegger, circa 1980.
I was sold.
by marbotty on
Jan 10, 2008 4:32 AM EST
up
0 recs
if I wasn't on an iPod I'd write a manifesto...
by PhattStairs on
Jan 10, 2008 11:24 AM EST
up
0 recs
The scientific research disagrees with you
by NYRoyal on
Jan 10, 2008 1:23 PM EST
up
0 recs
I don't even know what to say to that..
by PhattStairs on
Jan 10, 2008 7:53 PM EST
up
0 recs
It's not just one study
Ask any stunted growth kid that grew a foot after taking HGH if it works
If you are still in your growing years and you take HGH, it will help you grow. That much is clear. Just because HGH is good for something doesn't mean it's good for enhancing athletic performance.
ask any bodybuilder if it works (they will just laugh)...
Massive body builder doses can work. Clearly MLB players aren't taking those kind of massive doses.
guys I've known that have taken it have reported immediately feeling the best of their lives, work out time doubling ("I could go forever on a treadmeal"), and have called it "the ultimate fountain of youth"...
Data from scientific studies is worth a lot more than this kind of anecdotal evidence. Every heard of the placebo effect?
whoever that was that did the study is either a)on crack , b)payed to put out false info, c)got a bad batch of info, or d)overlooked something
There are many studies...and they point away from HGH enhancing athletic performance. Were all of these scientists on crack, corrupt and/or incompetent? I doubt it.
by NYRoyal on
Jan 10, 2008 8:31 PM EST
up
0 recs
very odd indeed
by PhattStairs on
Jan 10, 2008 11:01 PM EST
up
0 recs
I really wanna make a Supersize Me like...
by PhattStairs on
Jan 10, 2008 11:24 PM EST
up
0 recs
I would watch that movie!
by James Quinn on
Jan 11, 2008 10:28 AM EST
up
0 recs
I don't care for this signing
by royaldaddy on Jan 9, 2008 11:21 PM EST 0 recs
Yeah, I liked the Meche deal right away also.
by James Quinn on
Jan 9, 2008 11:45 PM EST
up
0 recs
One of those Player A, Player B things
Player A .437 OBP, .588 SLG
Player B .404 OBP, .602 SLG
Great numbers, huh? Well, Player B (Kenji Johjima) has managed the following numbers in MLB:
Johjima .327 OBP, .442 SLG
Player A is, of course, the great Fukudome. If he manages a Johjima-like .769 OPS he's going to be a terrific failure for the Cubs. I bring up Johjima because I didn't want anyone to think that this massive statistical dropoff is just a Kaz Matsui phenomenon. That kind of dropoff is actually more the norm than the exception.
by NYRoyal on Jan 9, 2008 11:34 PM EST 0 recs
To be fair
by Gopherballs on
Jan 10, 2008 1:14 AM EST
up
0 recs
Adjustment
by NYRoyal on
Jan 10, 2008 1:43 AM EST
up
0 recs
Probably close to that for last year
by Gopherballs on
Jan 10, 2008 1:57 AM EST
up
0 recs
Keep in mind...
by DarthYoshi on
Jan 10, 2008 2:26 AM EST
up
0 recs
Jose
.288/.354/.481
seem reasonable?
by doublestix on
Jan 10, 2008 2:54 AM EST
up
0 recs
Yes
by NYRoyal on
Jan 10, 2008 3:53 AM EST
up
0 recs
no
2001 KCR .495
2002 KCR .537
2003 KCR .454
2004 SEA .472
2005 SEA .436
2006 SEA .516
2007 SEA .480
Pretty similar, overall. He did have one horrible year in 2005, but his SLG in Seattle is very comparable to KCR, perhaps only 5-10 points less on average.
Please also note that the Royals moved their fences back in 2004, so odds are that had Raul continued with KC his SLG would have been even worse than what's listed above for SEA, or at least very close.
Sure, one person is not a particularly good sample size, so looks at the KC teams offensive production from 1999-2003 and 2004-2007.
Year Runs/game SLG
1999 5.32 .443
2000 5.43 .425
2001 4.50 .409
2002 4.55 .398
2003 5.16 .427
2004 4.44 .397
2005 4.33 .396
2006 4.67 .411
2007 4.36 .388
The decrease in production has been significant. We scored 5 runs three times in 5 years, but have only cleared 4.5 runs once in the last four. We slugged over .400 four out of five years, but only hit over .400 once in the last four.
Yes, we have had significant changes in personnel, and losing guys like Beltran and Dye surely have lowered our production.
But if you look at the holdovers, guys like Sweeney and Randa and Guiel, and you'll see significant drops in production in 2004 and later.
Perhaps the most striking example is our former ROY, Berroa, who had a career year in 2003, but once the fences moved, could never approach again that level of production.
Still, a lot of people think of KC as a hitter's park, when it really has reverted back to, or only slightly improved on, the version of what we had pre-1995.
Now, I'll admit all of this "research" was done very quickly and possibly haphazardly. But, I believe my points remain:
- Kauffman Stadium 2008 resembles more of the pitching friendly confines of the 1980's and early 90's than it does the hitters paradise of Kauffman 1995-2003
- if Raul is any example, there's no reason to expect Guillen to have any significant jump in SLG.
by marbotty on
Jan 10, 2008 5:23 AM EST
up
0 recs
Marbotty, I value your analysis, but...
Safeco is, on the other hand, an extreme pitcher's park. Everyone's 3-year park effects say so. There's no debate on that. And, given it's very, very spacious left field, it really hurts RH hitters. There is every reason to believe that the move to Kauffman Stadium will help Guillen's numbers across the board.
by NYRoyal on
Jan 10, 2008 5:30 AM EST
up
0 recs
admittedly, it was shallow analysis
Here's the relevant data: Baseball Reference has Seattle's park factor at 96 or 97, and KC's at 100 or 103.
Perhaps that's a huge difference. I don't really know exactly how that will translate.
I'm sure Guillen's SLG could go up a bit, but I don't see that 40 point swing you're talking about.
(Hey, I could have saved a bunch of time just doing that...)
by marbotty on
Jan 10, 2008 6:46 AM EST
up
0 recs
Ibanez and Guillen are invalid comps
by Gopherballs on
Jan 10, 2008 12:28 PM EST
up
0 recs
I don't think it will be 40 points
by NYRoyal on
Jan 10, 2008 1:22 PM EST
up
0 recs
The Johjima adjustment
by Gopherballs on
Jan 10, 2008 1:33 PM EST
up
0 recs
If Clay is correct...
by NYRoyal on
Jan 10, 2008 1:40 PM EST
up
0 recs
Per BP
Of course, that is not a prediction of what he will do next year, just a translation of his 2007 performance.
by Gopherballs on
Jan 10, 2008 1:39 PM EST
up
0 recs
Thanks for finding that
by NYRoyal on
Jan 10, 2008 1:41 PM EST
up
0 recs
whoops
if Raul is any example, there's no reason to expect Guillen to have any significant jump in SLG, especially when you consider Raul was hitting in a much more friendly park when he posted those SLG numbers in KC
by marbotty on
Jan 10, 2008 5:26 AM EST
up
0 recs
I think park adjustments are over emphasised
Plus Guillen played half his games away from Safeco.
Rough math here, but all other things being equal (which they never are) Guillen moving from Safeco to the K might boost his numbers between one and two percent.
It is a factor, but not a big one unless the hitter has some dominating characteristic which either plays for or against a specific park.
by James Quinn on
Jan 10, 2008 10:20 AM EST
up
0 recs
blah, subject lines, blah
by DarthYoshi on
Jan 10, 2008 11:40 AM EST
up
0 recs
If so Kauffman will not do him many favors.
Does anyone know were an understandable study of Kauffman vs. Safeco can be found?
Anyway, I think we likely are over-thinking this whole thing (ha, imagine that.) I doubt park adjustments will be a big factor in Guillen's success or failure, just one of many minor factors.
by James Quinn on
Jan 10, 2008 11:52 AM EST
up
0 recs
Look at the dimensions, JQ
And THT may think park factors don't mean much, but many others do, including our friends at BP. Have you seen the different PECOTA projections for Miguel Cabrera? Going from the Marlins to the Tigers, they have his SLG going down something like 40 points. Part of that is league change, but a big part of that is park factors. They are real, and can be significant.
by NYRoyal on
Jan 10, 2008 1:27 PM EST
up
0 recs
They are almost identical
LF 331 vs. 330
LC 390 vs. 385
CF 406 vs. 410
RC 387 vs. 385
RF 327 vs 330
In total Safeco is one foot deeper than Kauffman.
by James Quinn on
Jan 10, 2008 2:23 PM EST
up
0 recs
Deeper LF is meaningful
by NYRoyal on
Jan 10, 2008 2:45 PM EST
up
0 recs
Can you link to the BP article?
by James Quinn on
Jan 10, 2008 2:48 PM EST
up
0 recs
Can't link because BP is a pay site
Also interesting are Guillen's unadjusted home/road splits last year, which reflect a 52 point difference in SLG:
Safeco: 275/342/433 (320 PA)
Road: 304/363/485 (339 PA)
by Gopherballs on
Jan 10, 2008 3:12 PM EST
up
0 recs
DT cards are part of the free content
by NYRoyal on
Jan 10, 2008 3:18 PM EST
up
0 recs
might be significant over the course of the season
but is it significant to an individual effort? I tend to agree w/ JQ's conclusion, that we'll only be looking at a nominal increase in production from Guillen.
It's a sample size issue. Guillen offers only 600 at bats --- odds are 5 feet aren't going to make a huge difference over that span. But looking at 6,000 at bats from the entire team, you may see a pretty significant difference between the two parks.
by marbotty on
Jan 10, 2008 5:06 PM EST
up
0 recs
Feet, atmosphere etc.
by NYRoyal on
Jan 10, 2008 5:26 PM EST
up
0 recs
It's more than just dimensions
Of course, he will not perform exactly the same as 2007, and translating a previous year's performance to account for park factors does not, by itself, establish the player's performance in the next season. And I think you are right to doubt a monster improvement in Guillen's numbers next year. First, Guillen hit his share of balls the other way, so Safeco would not have hurt him as much as pure pull hitters. Second, Guillen had close to a career season last year, so it is reasonable to expect that Guillen may modestly underperform his 2007 (emphasis on modestly). If that is the case, his overall raw number may still show improvement thanks to the K, just not the same boost exhibited by purely translating his 2007 performance.
by Gopherballs on
Jan 10, 2008 5:45 PM EST
up
0 recs
Yes, I'm not expecting a .500 SLG
by NYRoyal on
Jan 10, 2008 5:52 PM EST
up
0 recs
Just curious
How has the MLB affected a guy like Ichiro's numbers? I realize he is a much different player than Guillen or Fukodome, but i was just curious
by fats on
Jan 10, 2008 9:38 AM EST
up
0 recs
Just in case you look at this later
http://cbs.sportsline.com/mlb/players/playerpage/211807
The average Japanese hitter had Avg/OBA/SLG drops of approx 10/12/24%. Dome won't have as bad a drop.
by Yoda on
Jan 11, 2008 11:22 PM EST
up
0 recs
Great numbers
by NYRoyal on
Jan 11, 2008 11:35 PM EST
up
0 recs
His drop could easily be worse.
- Park Factor - Paradoxically, he's going from a home park in Japan (the Nagoya Dome) which is a tough park to hit in versus most other parks in Japan, to a park that's easier to hit in (Wrigley) vs. league average in the majors.
- He' a line drive hitter, so he won't suffer from "big fly out" syndrome as much.
- His splits are relatively even and his D is good, so he won't get pulled from a game for many reasons. He'll face pitchers in late inning RBI situations, so therefore. . .
- . . . His great clutch hitting will shine. His history of performing in pressure situations has been very good. For example, he had 4 very clutch RBIs in the World Baseball Classic. His ARISP mirrors his batting average.
- He's going to be comfortable. The Cubs paid him $48 Mil because they feel he can really handle all the pressure. They have scouted him and know his history. They also intend to keep him comfortable, and have promised him he'll stay in RF and he's even wearing his old number.
- He's with a good offensive club, and that will help his overall numbers.
- His '07 injury cloaked the fact that his slg avg in the 4 previous years ('03-'06) averaged .604. Cut that by .24% and add about 10% for park factor (I'm being conservative here), you still get a slg of .520.
- If you throw Kaz Matsui's performance out the window, that average power drop for Japanese hitters is a fair bit better. And 'Dome is a MVP, his numbers will probably reflect the mean, as opposed to the average.
by Yoda on
Jan 12, 2008 6:12 PM EST
up
0 recs
A few quick comments/questions
- Is he more of a line drive hitter than the other Japanese imports we're comparing him too? By the way, were did you find the batted ball data for him that led you to conclude that he's "more of a line drive hitter?"
- Do you actually believe that "clutch hitting" is a repeatable skill? And, is he a better, consistent clutch hitter than the other Japanese imports? We're talking about whether he'll decline more or less than average for Japanese players. Is he better at this than the rest of these Japanese imports?
- Comfort level. Wasn't it you who posted some weeks ago that culture shock was going to be a major factor impacting Fukudome's performance? Suddenly because the Cubs gave him a lot of money, he's going to be comfortable and won't deal with culture shock?
- If we throw out the player who has done the worst in making the transition, shouldn't we throw out the player who has done the best as well?
Your arrogance is funny.
by NYRoyal on
Jan 12, 2008 6:25 PM EST
up
0 recs
Exhausting to debate you, but
- Please evaluate the footage and stats of the Japanese players in question yourself, and see if the players who had the lowest slg.% drops were line drive hitters. Do you feel that their swing path would dictate their LD%? Unable to locate complex data you mention for Fukudome in Japan. Probably highly unobtainable, so I went with video and anecdotal footage.
- Do you believe that all people deal with high stress situations at the same performance level, relative to their abilities? If so, what studies do you base that on? I certainly think that some players feel less stress and they do so on a repetitive basis.
- The post stating that there probably is culture shock associated with every Japanese player making the transition is mine. I mean, how could there be 2 Yodas in this world? I mentioned some of the evidences that the Cubs are making 'Dome feel comfortable. The money probably just makes him feel good.
- The art of statistics is in the evaluation and analysis. I also would throw away So Taguchi's numbers, not because he has the smallest drop (which he has), but because, like Kaz, he isn't in the same elite class.
by Yoda on
Jan 12, 2008 9:36 PM EST
up
0 recs
My final words on the subect
- You pointed out the average statistical dropoff for Japanese players and then said Fukudome's drop would be less than that. Then you pointed out that one reason for that was that he hit "more line drives." I assume "more" means more than the other Japanese imports (since you were saying that his numbers would drop less than them). But you don't have batted ball data or any other evidence that he's more of a line drive hitter than all or most of the other Japanese imports. You have anecdotal evidence that he's more of a line drive hitter than a fly ball hitter (some evidence, we still don't know if this is true). But this evidence only supports the contention that his numbers will drop less than other Japanese imports if he's more of a line drive hitter than other Japanese imports.
- You are assuming that the different reactions to stress are significant enough that they give rise to statistically significant differences in hitting in "clutch" situations. While there is no definitive answer to this question, so far the statistical research done on this leads strongly to the conclusion that "clutch hitting" as a skill or reliable phenomonenon does not exist. When this phenomenon tends to vary wildly for individual players and teams from year to year, it is hard to argue that there is something real going on here. Of course the research goes much deeper than that...but it points clearly away from "clutch hitting" being a skill.
5. I dont' think the culture shock thing is a big deal either way. But I found it very odd that you argued two or three weeks ago that culture shock will be a big factor for Fukudome and will affect his performance, and now you are arguing that he's going to be comfortable and that is a reason why he'll do better than other Japanese imports. What has changed? The reasoning that you gave for him being "comfortable" is that he's staying in RF and keeping his number? That will trump his culture shock? I see a direct and inexplicable contradiction here.
But let's say culture shock or the lack thereof is a significant factor. Is there any reason to believe that Fukudome's "culture shock" is going to be less than that which was experienced by other Japanese imports?
8. There is so little data that I don't think we can afford to throw out many players. I certainly wouldn't randomly throw out the player with the worst dropoff. And I'm sure you've looked at Kaz Matsui's Japanese stats. I don't


