The Lonesome Death Of Russell Martin's Power

by Eric Stephen on Jul 2, 2009 10:00 AM PDT in Research Comment 40 comments

The Dodgers, throughout their history, have been blessed with an inordinate amount of great-hitting catchers. Roy Campanella and Mike Piazza are the two standouts, but the Dodgers have also enjoyed good to very good seasons from backstops Paul LoDuca, Mike Scioscia, Joe Ferguson, Tom Haller, Johnny Roseboro, and Babe Phelps, just to name a few.

Russell Martin seemed prime to join the pantheon of great Dodger catchers. In his first three seasons, he made two All-Star teams, won a Silver Slugger award, and even mixed in a Gold Glove for good measure. Nobody has caught more innings than Martin since he made his debut in May 2006, and from 2006-2008 Martin had the fifth-highest OPS+ among all catchers in baseball.

However, a funny thing happened on the way to the Dodger Hall of Fame. Martin simply doesn't hit for power anymore. It was a little troubling last season, when Martin followed up his breakout .469-slugging, 19-homer 2007 with a .396 slugging percentage, but I'll never be disappointed in a catcher with a .385 on-base percentage. Besides, Martin was sure to improve this year because of his improved attitude and maturity. He even started doing yoga.

It hasn't helped. In the 126-year history of the Dodgers, there have been 34 different seasons in which a catcher has posted a slugging percentage under .300 (with at least 200 plate appearances). The king of these seasons is Bill Bergen, the worst hitter in the history of baseball. Bergen played eight seasons with Brooklyn, from 1904-1911. He has the seven lowest slugging percentages ever by a Dodger catcher, and the only reason he doesn't have eight seasons is because he only had 143 PA. Only six of these sub-.300 seasons have come since 1941. Russell Martin's slugging percentage in 2009 is .298 at essentially the halfway point this season.

On the wonderful Baseball-Reference.com, you can find a stat called OPS+, which is simply on-base percentage plus slugging percentage, normalized for park and league. 100 is average, anything above is above average, and anything below is below average. It is a nice way to compare players of different eras, leagues, or parks. Another stat you can find on Baseball-Reference.com is the league slugging percentage normalized for park. Its a way to find out what a league average non-pitcher would do in the same park. From there, we can develop a normalized slugging percentage, or SLG+ if you will. For instance, Russell Martin's slugging percentage is .288, and the league slugging (lgSLG) at Dodger Stadium in 2009 is .416, so his SLG+ is 72, meaning Martin is well below average.

Here are the all-time worst SLG+ numbers by a catcher in Dodger history (minimum 200 PA):

Catcher	Year	SLG	lgSLG	SLG+
Bill Bergen	1911	.154	.363	42
Bill Bergen	1909	.156	.319	49
Bill Bergen	1910	.177	.344	51
Bill Bergen	1906	.184	.310	59
Bill Bergen	1904	.207	.329	63
Bill Bergen	1905	.219	.335	65
Tex Erwin	1910	.228	.344	66
Mickey O'Neil	1926	.264	.396	67
Otto Miller	1918	.228	.337	68
Bill Bergen	1908	.215	.312	69
Steve Yeager	1980	.273	.385	71
Hank DeBerry	1927	.284	.400	71
Jack Ryan	1898	.252	.356	71
Russell Martin	2009	.298	.416	72
Steve Yeager	1978	.276	.385	72

There are still 83 games left in the season, so there is plenty of time for Martin to change the ending to this story. But when you are lumped in with the worst hitter in baseball history, the time to worry is here. Or, as Bob Dylan said in The Lonesome Death of Hattie Carroll:

Oh, but you who philosophize disgrace and criticize all fears,
Bury the rag deep in your face
For now's the time for your tears

0 recs | Comment 40 comments | Share

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Loney's slg pct is fifth from last

among all mlb first basemen, and that is a position which is more strongly associated with power than is catcher, Campy and Piazza notwithstanding.

by seesdifferent on Jul 2, 2009 11:01 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

As Loney’s salary begins to creep up, he will have to start producing more, or he could be easily replaced. Right now, his main saving grace(s) is that he isn’t being paid much and is yet to reach his peak.
vr, Xei

by Xeifrank on Jul 2, 2009 11:11 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Only Casey Kotchmen and Jason Giambi have lower slugging percentages then James Loney among Qualified MLB first basemen

by matthewmafa on Jul 2, 2009 11:13 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Kotchman might be a negative comp for Loney

as he was also expected to get some power as he matured but that is just not happening. As Xeifrank the only saving grace for Loney right now is his salary. If he does not improve anymore then Kotchman has improved no sense in even going to arbitration with him. Luckily finding 1st baseman who can hit is not as hard a task as finding a catcher who can hit which is why I rarely worry about Loney. If he fails to improve, he’s replaced, if he does improve then great because I like him.

by meercatjohn on Jul 2, 2009 11:16 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Its his lack of production that will still make Loney cheap.

I doubt he makes more than 2 million next year, even if he gets an absurd amount of RBIs

by Tripon on Jul 2, 2009 3:31 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

theres FOUR first basemen with a slugging percentage lower then JAMES LONEY! no way

by matthewmafa on Jul 2, 2009 11:08 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Hard to believe it was

only a year ago I was touting Martin as the keeper of the throne when it came to great Dodger catchers. In the spring of 2008 I even touted him as a possible MVP candidate. Many think he still has value because of that solid OBP skill but when OB is your only skill and you don’t even have double power you are simply a one dimensional player. Kendall is his exact comp right now and I don’t think you will find to many Oakland A fans who were big fans of his OB years. The saving grace just like Loney is that he’s cheap at the moment.

by meercatjohn on Jul 2, 2009 11:13 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Are both arbitration eligible this year?

by Michael White on Jul 2, 2009 11:20 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yep

by Eric Stephen on Jul 2, 2009 11:21 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Martin, Loney, Kemp, Ethier, Bills, Broxton are arb eligible. So are Kuo and Repko, but for differing reasons I don’t believe they will be back.

by Eric Stephen on Jul 2, 2009 11:35 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

So, Hodad's tomorrow after the game or for lunch?

by Jacob Burch on Jul 2, 2009 11:17 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Lunch is better for me…I don’t even know how late they open…I’m down for a postgame get together too though

by Eric Stephen on Jul 2, 2009 11:21 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

For all the young players we felt we needed to wrap up

only Billingsley and Kemp are on my list at the moment.

by meercatjohn on Jul 2, 2009 11:18 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Broxton

by matthewmafa on Jul 2, 2009 11:21 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Generally speaking

Aren’t closers almost always too expensive compared to “true” value?

by Michael White on Jul 2, 2009 11:23 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I love Big John

but I doubt I’d be giving him a multi-year deal. I’d probably go year to year and see if his arm is still attached when he’s finally eligible for free agency. Maybe he’s Lee Smith, maybe not, just not a fan of locking up closers.

by meercatjohn on Jul 2, 2009 11:32 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

the elephant in the room

does anyone want to bring it up regarding Russels power?

by buffsnbruins on Jul 2, 2009 11:32 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

He's been playing since testing was initiated

so I don’t see how that is relevant. The only change has been the ban on greenies starting in 2008. That could effect him day to day but I don’t see how that can be related to his power outage.

Unless you mean the elephant is Don Mattingly because Russell Martin has not been very good since Donny became hitting coach.

by meercatjohn on Jul 2, 2009 11:34 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Meloan traded to the Rays

In case anyone missed it. The Indians got Winston Abreu in return. Maybe Tampa can turn John’s career around.

by silverwidow on Jul 2, 2009 1:41 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I remember giving Ned

plenty of grief for not using Meloan the summer of 07 when he traded for Proctor and left us with no 3rd baseman once Nomar went down. I’d have to say he was right given Meloan’s performance since then. Maybe we screwed him up in 08 by trying to make him a starter but it is not like he’s done much better once the Indians put him back in the bullpen.

Didn’t it seem like the Indians didn’t get much back for DeRosa?

by meercatjohn on Jul 2, 2009 1:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I was thinking it was just a pure salary dump being the reason for less return, but DeRosa’s contract only runs through this year, and there is only ~ $3.2 million or so the Cards have to pay. Perhaps the economy of baseball is in worse shape than we thought?

by Eric Stephen on Jul 2, 2009 2:20 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'm just glad it's the Cards and not the Giants that picked up DeRosa seemingly cheap

He would help in one the positions they could really use an offensive upgrade at, 2B.

by David Young on Jul 2, 2009 3:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Has Garrett Gould signed with the Dodgers yet?

by matthewmafa on Jul 2, 2009 2:27 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Outside of Silverwidow’s report, there is no news. I emailed Josh Rawitch of the Dodgers but haven’t yet heard back.

by Eric Stephen on Jul 2, 2009 2:28 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Carlos Santana

Every time I read about Russell Martin’s offensive funk — and I’m increasingly concerned that he’s a short-peak career guy — I think just how expensive the trade for Casey Blake was, especially in terms of losing Carlos Santana, currently hitting .268/.405/.496 in the Eastern League for AA Akron with Cleveland.

Witty .sig goes here.

by scareduck on Jul 2, 2009 2:31 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Good article, BTW

I’m worried about Martin, too. I find it interesting that his B-Ref comps include some players like Troy Tulowitzki, and in particular, Kenji Johjima, who had great early years and then cratered.

Witty .sig goes here.

by scareduck on Jul 2, 2009 2:34 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Thanks

Who knows, maybe Martin can have a mini-resurgence like Tulo this year. Maybe it takes Jim Tracy :)

by Eric Stephen on Jul 2, 2009 2:39 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

It's more likely than with Johjima

who was near the end of his career as a catcher when he signed with the M’s.

Witty .sig goes here.

by scareduck on Jul 2, 2009 2:55 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I thought we could ask the question here since 1/2 of us were big fans of Carlos

If Carlos Santana was still owned by the Dodgers, do you think we’d be hearing some calls for him to get some major league at bats? Martin jumped right from AA to the Dodgers and didn’t miss a beat. Would those footsteps have hurt or helped Martin? In Cleveland Santana is blocked by Victor Martinez and Shoppach so I’m curious to see how that plays out. Maybe they forget the catching experiment and decide to get his bat to the bigs by turning him back into a 3rd baseman or outfielder which is what he was before the move. I doubt the Dodgers ever move him to catcher if they knew his bat would explode like that. Still getting interesting takes on Santana. The two prospect analysts for HQ really have different view points on him. At the 1/2 way point one has him as the 12th best prospect among prospects who are not in the major leagues, while the other has dropped him all the way to 42nd based on the fact he doesn’t think he can stay as a catcher. No Dodger made the top 50 of either list.

The biggest problem with Martin is that Kendall has always been his best comp when you look at speed/power for a catcher. The expected peak of Martin compared to Kendall never happened but he eerily resembles the post peak Kendall very much which I don’t consider a good thing. When Manny is gone a strong hitting catcher would be nice to have, not a post peak Jason Kendall.

by meercatjohn on Jul 2, 2009 3:25 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Martin jumped right from AA to the Dodgers and didn’t miss a beat.

He actually played a month in AAA Vegas.

by silverwidow on Jul 2, 2009 3:26 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Steve Yeager 1978

The 1978 team won 95 games and went to the World Series. Yeager, however, played in only 94 games.

by David Young on Jul 2, 2009 3:19 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Duke Temple also got into two ALCS and one World Series with Cleveland.

by Eric Stephen on Jul 2, 2009 3:38 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Assume here

that I criticized the use of OPS+ again and moved on.

Apart from the use a mostly meaningless stat, the point is valid. Martin’s expectations should be adjusted downward based on his performance this year. If he were a great defensive catcher, this might not matter much. As it is, his offense is an important part of what he brings to the table. The only good news is we have an outstanding catching prospect in Santana, so if Martin can’t fix his issues soon, we should have a good replacement. Oh, wait…

by Paul Scott on Jul 2, 2009 4:13 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs

Can you explain at what point in the season, if ever, it is acceptable to use OPS+?

Is the issue one of sample size, and if so, isn’t this somewhat mitigated with the use of 3-year park factors? Or are the schedules so uneven during season that it is a fruitless exercise?

Thanks.

by Eric Stephen on Jul 2, 2009 5:19 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

In Baseball Hacks

author Joseph Adler derived 250 at-bats as the minimum needed to have a true batting average (presumably the same is true for OBP, SLG, and OPS) 80% of the time, within +/-10%.

Witty .sig goes here.

by scareduck on Jul 2, 2009 5:28 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I am not sure it ever is

Park Factors control for essentially two things: physical park properties – and these remain constant or are obviously different if the park changes or a park makes a change – and weather. A 3-year park factor would mitigate that (or, in the case of, for instance, Yankee Stadium, would make it absurd). I feel the only appropriate use of something like OPS+ is for “quickie” career comparisons. (If you want to do a serious job, then use some form of lwts).

Now, for Martin in particular, it seems very odd. Your entire point seemed to me to be that Martin has suffered a serious drop in his power (and thus his offensive value). Martin has played his entire MLB career in the same park for the same team, so why are we looking at OPS+ at all. For a “quickie” isn’t your point as (or, really, more) forcefully made just using SLG? Or, if you wanted a more thorough analysis, use components. But OPS+? What does it do for us?

Now, for the sort of fluff part of the piece (but none-the-less fun and interesting) discussing Dodger catchers, historically, then you want to Lg and Park adjust everything. The SLG+ was a fun chart. I am not sure it is all that meaningful until we actually see what Dodger Stadium looks like at the end of the year, but sure – it made a nice chart that was not central to your point.

I think, too, that an attempt to analyze why Martin has lost power (and by why, I mean what components are responsible, rather than things you cannot measure such as “his approach”) would be interesting. TBLA has paid for the access it needs to examine that. Additionally, although new, there is a fair bit of HitF/X available, for free, now, that my give some clues. Just some thoughts.

by Paul Scott on Jul 2, 2009 5:45 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Thanks for the thoughts and explanation.

I don’t think I used OPS+ for much other than to point out that Martin was a good hitter the last few years, compared to other catchers. But it wasn’t the main point of the piece.

by Eric Stephen on Jul 2, 2009 5:56 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs