As reported by all the usual suspects (here is the Haft analysis, for example), Javier Lopez signed a three-year $13M contract with the Giants and it just became official yesterday, after he had his physical. To get him onto the 40-man roster, which was filled up by the recent promotion of minor leaguers ahead of the Rule 5 Draft, the Giants outrighted Jose Mijares to AAA, who, after clearing waivers (i.e. no team wanted to take him onto their 40 man roster, most likely because they would have to go into arbitration with him), elected for free agency instead of AAA, probably in hopes of finding a major league roster at a lower (but still higher than minor league pay) price point. He was already being rumored to be a non-tender candidate (MLBTR had him pegged at $2.1M via arbitration)
Lopez was swayed by Sabean stating that the Giants wanted him back last season, apparently on more than one occasion. It was "a big deal" to Lopez, as he had never had a GM do that before. However, not swayed enough to sign before becoming a free agent, and it was reported that he had interest from up to 10 teams. The biggest competition for his services had been reported to be the Nationals, because he grew up in the DC area and still have family and friend there who were hoping he would sign there. However, he noted that he wants "to finish up as a Giant and that was ultimately a better place for me at this time."
ogc thoughts
About time, I was getting a little worried that the Nats might sway him, even though reporters noted that he would probably bring any deal to the Giants before moving on. That is a great contract, it covers his 36, 37, and 38 YO seasons and as a LOOGY, he don't get used much, so his arm is still relatively unused, plus, in general, LHP seem to have longer careers. It is also great as it worked out to $4.3M per season, and I and many others thought that he would end up with $6M per season. And he just had his best season ever, so even if he declined some, he would still be great. I'm very happy with this signing.
Looking at his stats, I noticed a very interesting anomaly, which speaks to the Giants magic with pitchers. At the time he was acquired, his K/9 was 5.5 K/9 and BB/9 was 4.2, for a 1.33 K/BB and while he was pitching OK for Pittsburgh before he was traded to us, it was around his career numbers, 5.1 K/9 and 4.2 BB/9, 1.22 K/BB, though lower, as he had his worse season ever in 2009, where he was totally lost (6.9 BB/9!). Here is his Giants career numbers: 7.4 K/9, 3.3 BB/9, 2.24 K/BB, all very good numbers and a stark contrast with his career numbers before. Before, 25% of inherited runners scored under his watch, with the Giants 12%. And he had his best season ever in this too, with only 11% scoring, low before Giants was in 2004 with 13% and he had 19% in 2003, but from 2005 to 2010, before we got him, he had a 30% inherited runners scoring on him (for comparison, in 2013, the Giants overall had 29% - and that is including his amazing numbers, and the league average was 27%). Now you see why the Giants had to get him back.
Relievers are not Fungible
And, of course, the sabers are probably laughing at this deal right now. Many believe that relievers are fungible and easily replaceable and thus money should be spent elsewhere. The A's epitomizes this concept with Beane getting rid of his closers like a fantasy baseball team, picking up good assets in return. There is an article out there pointing out how easily teams could replace their closer, that having an experienced closer is not that valuable, since these teams could replace their prior, failing, closer so easily.
The problem, for me, is that this is not true. If it was, we would not have gone through the Benitez Experience and the aftermath of that. If Nen's production was easy to replace, then why wasn't the transition smoother, it took years before we got Wilson as a true valid replacement of Nen. And for all you Sabean Naysayers, it is not just the Giants having this problem, other teams do too, plus the Giants history with the bullpen is pretty good overall, we have usually had a strong bullpen throughout the Sabean era, as well as picking up good relievers that others discarded, like Casilla and Eyre.
And just because you have a closer does not mean that he will come through for you when the chips are down in the playoffs. You may be able to easily replace a closer, but none of the analysis I've ever seen on this subject takes into account the quality of the replacement. Saves are always going to go to someone, and even the worse teams in the league will have a guy saving 30 games, just because someone has to get that opportunity.
Put another way, if finding good relievers is so easy and cheap, then why do so many clubs have problems with their bullpen? Teams know their talent, studies have shown this, so then it would be an easy matter of dumping the pitchers who are not good and inserting in the good relievers that you can find so easily and cheaply. By this logic then, every team should be able to have a bullpen group that is incredibly good. The whole house of cards that sabers have built on their relievers are fungible concept falls apart given how hard it is to find good relievers, let alone good closers.
The Giants have had a great luxury over the past few years. They have had at least three guys capable of closing for them: Romo, Casilla, and Affeldt, plus Wilson previously. If Hembree makes the team, we could be back up to four again, depending on Affeldt coming back from his injury marred season (I do expect that). If you want that mass of talent in the back of your bullpen, you need to pay for them eventually.
Mijares Era is Over
We hardly knew ye! He had an OK season, 4.22 ERA, but great 9.9 K/9 and 2.70 K/BB, which are all very good pitching peripherals, plus Bill James reported him at 63% strikes thrown and 16% swinging strikes, both good numbers, and he'll be only 29 YO next season, so why the DFA? He could even be a pretty good LOOGY if given the chance, LHB only hit .276/.343/.367/.710 against him, very low OPS (though, wow, very high batting average and OBP), great 4.38 K/BB, and excellent 35 K's out of 109 PA. I think it was a combination of things.
First of all, he's a reliever, but he wasn't good with runners inherited. He allowed 41% of his runners to score, one of the highest on the team (second highest for relievers with 25 or more inherited runners; FYI, Dunning was first with 44%). As noted above, the league average is 27%, so he was pretty bad. And he had the second most inherited runners, with 46, only Lopez was higher (making his 11% even more impressive).
Secondly, on top of that, his leverage index was only 0.732, where 1.0 is average pressure, so it was not like he was used in high pressure situations a lot. It should have been easy peasy to keep those runners from scoring. And in his 16 high leverage situations, though he only gave up 4 runs out of 16 runners, an OK 25% scoring rate, emblematic of his struggles in such situations, his first one of the 2013 season, he came in with no runners and left with the bases loaded, and that was not the only time that happened in the season.
Finally, as nice as it is to have three lefty relievers in the bullpen, saving Lopez and Affeldt for set-up duties, the Giants probably are going to have a roster crunch there. There are 7 bullpen spots for the Giants. We already have Romo, Affeldt, Casilla, and now Lopez signed for the 2014 season and taking the key roles in the bullpen, leaving three. Petit is out of options so he most likely will be our long reliever (as signified by the Giants releasing Moscoso recently), leaving two spots.
For those two spots, just from the expected relievers we had last season, these guys will be battling for spots: Jake Dunning, Heath Hembree, George Kontos, Jean Machi, and Sandy Rosario. I noted Dunning's problems with inherited runners above (his leverage was low too). Rosario only had a 61% strike thrown and 13% swinging strikes, both very low, with a very low 5.2 K/9 while a very high 4.3 BB/9 for a lousy 1.20 K/BB ratio, all belying his 3.02 ERA (probably earned by his fellow relievers saving him from a much worse ERA). Rosario's hold on a roster spot is probably as tenuous as Mijares if the Giants need another 40-man spot.
That leaves Hembree, Kontos and Machi as the most likely ones to win the two spots. And after his sterling debut in 2013, I would think the Giants is hoping that Hembree is ready to take a spot in the bullpen (he had a great 66% strike thrown rate and 26% swinging strike). Also, Kontos had a great 2012 for us, and admitted that he came into 2013 not in the best of shapes, so he's probably dedicated to returning to his 2012 form. And Machi had a great season for us, and one of our fastest fastballs on the staff, 92.8 MPH average (though also high inherited runners scoring, 34%, but same as Kontos; Kontos ). Plus, Derek Law really shined this season and continued it into the AFL, so he could be the dark horse for a spot.
If I had to guess, I think Hembree is being penciled in for a spot, similar to Wilson in his first try for a roster spot (he blew it with a poor spring), and that Kontos and Machi will be battling for that last reliever spot, with Law having an outside chance of earning it over them. FYI, Kontos had a good 65% strike thrown rate and 17% swinging strike, and Machi had a good 64%, but excellent 18% swinging strike rate.
So it is already a pretty crowded and competitive situation in the bullpen, even without considering Mijares as an option. And as much as Mijares could be a LOOGY, we already have one of the best in the game in Lopez, so it would be a luxury to have two. So the writing has been on the wall, for a while now, as there has been talk since the season ended that he was one likely to be non-tendered.
Thanks and good luck to Mijares, he did great for us in 2012 (had a great 11% inherited runners scoring and 2.55 ERA), and helped us in the playoffs, especially in the NLCS with 3 strong appearances, 2.0 IP, one hit and one walk, with 3 strikeouts. He will always be able to show off his World Series ring wherever he goes.
No comments:
Post a Comment