Author Archive

Miguel Olivo and The Value of a Cy Young Award-Winning Catcher

In 2009, 26-year-old Kansas City Royals ace, Zack Greinke, enjoyed a breakout season, going 16-8 with an American League leading 2.16 ERA and winning the American League Cy Young Award.  Greinke got off to a blazing start, throwing three complete games in his first six starts and allowing only two earned runs. 

Greinke’s success came in spite of pitching for a Kansas City Royals staff that finished with the third worst team ERA in the American League.

In 2010, 26-year-old Colorado Rockies ace, Ubaldo Jimenez, has gotten off to a blazing start.  He is currently 7-1 with a 1.12 ERA. He is allowing less than six hits per nine innings, and has only allowed one homerun in 56.1 innings pitched.  Jimenez has always had velocity, but his control is peaking this season; he has a career high 2.57 K/BB ratio and his WHIP is under 1.000. 

Oh, and Jimenez also has a no-hitter this season.

So what is it that Zack Greinke version 2009, and Ubaldo Jimenez version 2010, have in common? 

Other than peaking at the age of 26-years-old, Greinke and Jimenez share a certain 6’0″ tall Dominican catcher by the name of Miguel Olivo.

Olivo’s career has been a curious one.  Signed by the Oakland Athletics in 1996 as an amateur free agent, it took him six full years to break into the majors permanently despite having several successful minor league seasons.   Since first breaking onto the scene in 2003, Olivo has played for six teams in nine years, making stops with the White Sox, Mariners, Padres, Marlins, Royals, and now Rockies. 

All he has done during that period is catch two no-hitters — Anibal Sanchez in 2006 and Jimenez this season — and shepherd at least one Cy Young Award winner through his best season. 

So what gives?

For one thing, Olivo has always been a terrible hitter; even when he’s been good he’s been bad.  He has never finished a season — in full or in part — with an on-base percentage higher than .292 (though he is off to a good start in 2010).  As a hitter his strikeout-to-walk ratios have been some of the worst of all time — he has had seasons of 80/8, 103/9, 123/14, 82/7, and 126/19.

Frankly, there hasn’t always been good evidence to support the proposition that Olivo is a good defensive catcher.  For his career, he throws out about 35 percent of base runners, which is fine, but the pitching staffs for which Olivo has been the primary catcher have occasionally suffered.  The most prominent example of this was the 2007 Florida Marlins team which gave up the most runs in the National League.

On the other hand . . .

In 2003, Esteban Loaiza enjoyed the only successful season of his career for the White Sox.  He went 21-9 with a 2.90 ERA and led the league in strikeouts with 207.  This is a guy with a 126-114 career record and a 4.65 career ERA. 

His catcher for all but three games of 2003 was Miguel Olivo.

In 2004, the White Sox had Olivo for the first half of the season and then traded him to the Seattle Mariners.  The White Sox team ERA for the first half of the season was 4.59, almost three quarters of a run lower than their 5.26 team ERA in the second half of the season.

In 2006, the Marlins had three brilliant rookie pitchers.  Josh Johnson finished fourth in the Rookie of the Year voting with a 12-7 record and a 3.10 ERA.  Miguel Olivo was his catcher.  Anibal Sanchez went 10-3 with a 2.83 ERA and a no-hitter.  Olivo was his catcher.  Scott Olsen went 12-10 with a 4.04 ERA, but had a 4.23 ERA with his primary catcher, Matt Treanor, and a 3.61 ERA in 57.1 innings throwing to Olivo. 

The troubles in 2007, really, were due to a horrendous defense that gave up hits like a sieve.  Olivo was a part-timer with the Royals in 2008, backing up John Buck, which pretty much brings us to 2009. 

Zack Greinke’s 2009 season is only part of the Miguel Olivo 2009 story.  Somehow, Olivo became a bit of an offensive powerhouse last season, hitting 23 homeruns with 65 RBI and 51 runs scored in only 114 games.

Now, at this point you’re probably thinking to yourself, “Yeah, but he also had 126 strikeouts, an OBP under .300, and a .781 OPS.  You call that powerhouse?”

In a word, yes. 

Remember, this wasn’t the New York Yankees, Boston Red Sox, or Philadelphia Phillies.  This was the Kansas City Royals.  Last year, Miguel Olivo and Billy Butler became the first Royals to hit 20 or more homeruns since 2005, when Mike Sweeney hit 21.

The last Royal to hit 25 homeruns was Carlos Beltran, with 26 in 2003. The last Royal to hit 30 homeruns was Jermaine Dye, with 33 in 2000. The last Royal with 35 homeruns was Gary Gaetti in 1995, with exactly 35. The only Royal ever to hit more than 35 was Steve Balboni, with 36 in 1985!  Miguel Olivo hitting 23 homeruns in 114 games makes him the Babe Ruth of Kansas City Royals history. 

Or at least the Rob Deer.

Nevertheless, on the heels of a legendary (by Kansas City standards) offensive season, and one of the sparkling pitching performances in recent American League history, the Royals decided to let Olivo go.  And get this: he signed with the Colorado Rockies for two million dollars!  

For two million dollars, the Royals could have kept Zack Greinke’s catcher and the recent power posterboy of the franchise.  Instead, they brought in veteran Jason Kendall, who for the last two years has been the catcher for an underachieving Milwaukee Brewers pitching staff.  

So, one year later, Zack Greinke is 1-4 and, while still pitching well, has watched all of his numbers decline over last season.  The Royals have the worst team ERA+ in the American League. 

Meanwhile, Olivo is in Colorado helping Ubaldo Jimenez to a Cy Young Award of his own and — get this — leading the Rockies in homeruns and RBI while ranking second in batting average and OPS, and third in total bases.  And oh by the way, the Rockies have a 117 ERA+, good for fourth in the National League.

Let this be a lesson to all you kiddies out there — you would never let a Cy Young Award winning pitcher get away via free agency. 

Maybe you should not let Cy Young Award winning catchers get away either.

 

Asher B. Chancey lives in Philadelphia and is the co-founder of BaseballEvolution.com.

Read more MLB news on BleacherReport.com


Derek Jeter and the Greatest Lie Ever Told

Read Adam Rosen’s article on The Top 21 Moments in Yankees History.   It is a fun read, and who doesn’t love reminiscing about the Yankees? 

Unfortunately, Adam takes the opportunity to propagate one of the great myths about Derek Jeter—that he once made some incredible play where he dove into the stands to catch a ball at a pivotal moment in a crucial game against the Red Sox.

“The game was on the line, so Jeter dove fearlessly into the stands, making one of the greatest catches of all-time,” Adam wrote.

Adam isn’t the only person who has mischaracterized  the greatness or the significance of this play. 

The New Yorker once ran a comic-strip style two page spread of the great moments in Yankee Stadium history, and somehow failed to include Roger Maris’ 61st home run while including Jeter’s catch.

The New York Daily News once ran a piece in which it also gave great critical acclaim to Jeter’s catch, placing it amongst the immortal moments in baseball history.

Here is what the Daily News had to say.

“In the top of the 12th inning, the Red Sox had two outs, and runners on second and third. Trot Nixon hit the ball towards shallow left. If the ball had dropped in, the Red Sox would have gone ahead.

As Jeter raced for the ball, he realized that he would have to dive for it. But the ball was coming down just in front of the stands.

There was no way that Jeter could get the ball without diving face-first into the stands. But the game was on the line, and Derek Jeter did not hesitate to make the play that, along with the 2001 Flip Play, has defined his career.

Jeter fearlessly made the catch, fell into the stands, and ended up bruised and bloody. People sitting near him helped him up. Then a dazed Jeter, holding a cloth next to his mouth to stop it from bleeding, was helped off the field.”

Sorry, this didn’t happen.

Before this falsehood becomes part of baseball history, I would like to set the record straight. 

Hmmm. Where to begin? How about…

a) This game took place on July 1, 2004. The Yankees were 7.5 games ahead of the Red Sox at the time in the AL East. I don’t think that this was a must win.

b) Don’t dare compare that catch to his play against the A’s in 2001, which was one of the greatest plays of all time.

In 2001, the Yankees were down 2-0 in a best of five series, and Jeremy Giambi scoring on that play would have tied the score in the bottom of the seventh.

That throw missed not one but two cutoff men—Jeter could have easily stood by and watched, expecting either of those guys to make the play—and Jeter came out of nowhere to make a throw that would have been late a milli-second later.

That single play saved the Yankees playoffs and gave us one of the most exciting World Series in history two weeks later.

c) If he had to dive into the stands to make the catch, doesn’t that make it a foul ball , which would not have allowed any runners to score? Wouldn’t that be the case even if it was coming down merely in front of the stands ?

At this point, an incongruity emerges—either the ball was foul, in which case there was no danger of runs scoring, or it was fair, in which case diving into the stands was absurdly unnecessary.

Let’s go to the tape!

I have managed to capture some stills from the play. In this first one, we see Jeter with arm and glove outstretched, the ball is a blur just above his glove.

In the second frame, Jeter has caught the ball, and as you can clearly see, he is both several feet inside the foul line, and probably another ten feet or so from the wall.

This next shot shows Jeter in his last step in fair territory. As you can see, he is standing on his right leg, with his left leg raised.

In the shot before, he had his right leg raised and was standing on his left leg. He has now taken at least one step with the ball, and he is still in fair territory.

He has caught the ball, and he has saved two runs from scoring. The inning is over.

I should point out here that, from the video of the play, Jeter was apparently playing over by the bag with a left-hander batting, so he really has ranged quite far.

This next shot is Jeter about to step over the foul line.

 

In this next shot, we see Jeter stepping across the foul line and facing the stands. At this point, I think it is safe to say Jeter realizes he is going over, and is bracing for the impact.

 

The next shot shows Jeter jumping into the stands. It looks to me like he had the option —in split second timing, of course—of colliding with the wall and absorbing all of the impact, or jumping over the wall and hoping the cushion would be softer.

I would have jumped too.

 

In the next two shots, we see why this play has gained so much notoriety—these shots show Jeter, heading into the stands, parallel to the ground, totally laid out.

Over the years it has been too easy to assume that he laid out parallel to the ground to catch the ball, when in reality he’d had it for two or three steps by now. The lay-out was simply a way of containing the damage.

 

The last shot is enough to make you question the whole play when you compare it to the first picture.

Jeter is in full lay out dive into the stands.

 

Now look again at the first shot. Look how far from the stands he is just as the ball is about to land in his glove. Look how much ground he had to cover to end up in the stands.

 

Are you kidding me?

Look, I will be the first to admit that when you watch the video at full speed it is an impressive catch, but to call it a “diving catch” or a “catch where he dives into the stands” is to mis-characterize it.

To chalk up his diving into the stands to “bravery” or “fearlessness” is absurd.

To say that “As Jeter raced for the ball, he realized that he would have to dive for it,” is simply untrue. Because he DIDN’T dive for it, and it isn’t clear that Jeter knew anything about the approaching wall.

Basically, this is simply pro-Yankee demagoguery.

Perhaps the funniest line of all from the Daily News coverage of the event is “There was no way that Jeter could get the ball without diving face-first into the stands.

It is almost like they’re trying to be ironic. I mean come on—he could have hopped, he could have cannon-balled, he could have slid.

But let’s not be too hard on the Daily News. After all, they aren’t the only people who have overblown the importance and incredibility of Jeter’s catch.

Jon Robinson of INGSports.com once asked Jeter in an interview, “When you flew into the stands like Superman last year after that ball, did you know you were going to pay the price with a little blood?”

The great Ed Bradley once described the catch by saying, “No play says more about Jeter than the now legendary diving catch he made last year in which he placed his body—not to mention his $20 million salary—at risk.”

Mark Bechtel, actually writing about how overrated Jeter is said, “A look at Jeter’s numbers shows that he probably shouldn’t be making $20 million. Yes, I know about the diving catch into the stands against the Red Sox and the flip to get Jeremy Giambi at the plate against the A’s in a playoff game.”

In a kidzworld.com biography of Jeter (compelling stuff, right?), the narrator states that “Jeter’s diving-in-the-stands catch during a 2004 regular season game against the Boston Red Sox was one of the most memorable catches ever. So memorable, in fact, that we don’t even tend to remember what actually happened.”

The year that Jeter’s play was named Play of the Year by Major League Baseball, MLB.com described the play like this: “Derek Jeter dives into the stands to rob Boston’s Trot Nixon in the 12th inning of a huge midsummer game.” That description actually includes sensationalising the play AS WELL AS the importance of the game.

Ironically, Tim Kurkjian, one of my least favorite baseball writers, is one of the few writers to accurately describe the play, “There was the running catch, and subsequent bloody tumble into the stands, on July 1 last year against the Red Sox.”

Of course, its not like Kurkjian was downplaying Jeter or his accomplishments—this description actually came in an article in which Kurkjian was making the case that Jeter, rather than Alex Rodriguez, Barry Bonds, Albert Pujols, or Roger Clemens was the current “Face of Baseball.” Ugh.

I could go on forever, but I think I’ve made my point.

Next time someone asks you about that great Derek Jeter diving catch into the stands against the Red Sox, make sure you correct the person.

The lie has been perpetrated long enough.

Read more of what Asher thinks of Derek Jeter at BaseballEvolution.com.

Read more MLB news on BleacherReport.com


Top Ten Philadelphia Phillies Pitchers of All Time

When Roy Halladay joined the Philadelphia Phillies, I made a comment on local sports-talk radio that Halladay immediately joins the Phillies’ Mount Rushmore of starting pitchers. Was this hyperbole?

Could a guy in his first season with the Phillies ( a team founded in 1883) possibly be one of the top four starting pitchers in the team’s history?

Let’s take a look at the All Time Phillies pitching staff.

Begin Slideshow


Justin Morneau: Having a Better Year than You Think

By now the amazing season that Justin Morneau is having isn’t just a well-kept secret in the Minnesota area. Indeed, there are dozens of baseball fans outside of the Twin Cities buzzing about Morneau’s performance. 

But there is more than meets the eye to the season Morneau is having, and Morneau’s numbers are, I dare say, more impressive than they seem.

For the record, Morneau is currently the American League leader in all of your RSL categories, with a .374 average, a .491 on-base percentage, a .710 slugging percentage, and a 1.201 OPS.  He also leads the AL in OPS+ with a  robust 225, and in bases-on-balls with 30.

This has translated well into the SABRmetrics as well: Morneau leads the majors in WAR, runs created, adjusted batting runs, adjusted batting wins, offensive winning percentage, and situational wins added.

And consider this crazy factoid: Morneau already has more adjusted batting runs in 2010, through 36 games played, than he did in all of 2009, in 135 games.

I don’t know what any of that means, but it seems to me that he is dominating baseball.

Now, if you’re paying attention to the Minnesota Twins at all, then the first thing that occurred to you when I read you all of those numbers is: It must be the new ballpark. It was certainly the first thing that occurred to me. If Morneau is a new player, and he has become that new player in the first season in his new home park, then the new home park must be responsible. Right?

And that, my friends, is where this gets interesting. Let’s take a little trip down to Splitsville and examine just what effect Morneau’s new home park has had on him.

Justin Morneau has played 18 games at home and 18 games on the road. In 18 home games, he has 77 plate appearances. In 18 road games, he has 84 plate appearances.

 

Homeruns: Justin Morneau has hit 11 homeruns this season.  Nine of them have come on the road.

RBI: Justin Morneau has 29 RBI on the season in 2010.  20 of them have come on the road.

Hits: Morneau has 49 hits this season, 27 of which have come on the road (as opposed to 22 at home).  Of his nine doubles this season, six have come on the road.

Walks and Strikeouts: Morneau has drawn 30 walks and struck out 28 times this season.  Curiously, 17 of his have come at home, while his strikeouts have been split evenly.

Total Bases: Morneau has had 33 of his 93 total bases—just less than a third—at home.

RSL Stats: Morneau’s batting average and on-base percentage are roughly even at home and on the road—.367/.380 and .506/.476—but get this: because of the doubles and homerun advantages on the road, his slugging percentage is nearly 300 points higher on the road—.550/.845—which has roughly the same effect on his OPS—1.056/1.321.

If you’ve paid any attention to Justin Morneau’s career, you anticipated his numbers going up this season because, well, it is an even numbered year. Just like Alex Rodriguez, Juan Gonzalez, and Bret Saberhagen before him, Justin Morneau is one of the most drastic every-other-season guys in baseball.

Check out this stat: Morneau’s OPS and batting runs numbers have never increased or decreased in consecutive seasons during his career. Even numbered years are always up seasons, and odd numbered years are always down seasons:

Year        OPS+       ABR

2003        73           -4.5

2004       121           8.0

2005        93           -6.3

2006       140          36.0

2007       122          19.0

2008       134          32.8

2009       129          22.9

2010       225          24.3

Nevertheless, there is no way anyone could have anticipated an “up” year quite like this one.

So what does it all mean?

Short story: Justin Morneau is playing the best ball in the American League despite actually being hurt by his own home park.  Considering the fact that he is currently third in the major leagues with 11 homeruns, it would appear that if he’d played all his games on the road so far this season, he would be running away with a homerun crown.

More importantly, though, it means that Justin Morneau has escaped a nasty American League trend. Remember, Justin Morneau’s 2009 season was curtailed in mid-September when he was diagnosed with a stress fracture in his back, and he ended up missing the last two weeks of the season as well as the Twins’ improbably run to the playoffs.

But so far in 2010, Morneau has made it clear that he is fully recovered from his injury, and he has also loudly declared that any dip in his numbers last season were the result of injuries, and not an indication that he is anything but one of the elite hitters in the American League.

We’re listening Justin. There are dozens of us who can hear you loud and clear.

Read more MLB news on BleacherReport.com


Copyright © 1996-2010 Kuzul. All rights reserved.
iDream theme by Templates Next | Powered by WordPress