Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Phil Mickelson Outshines Tiger Woods

Are Matt Kemp's HRs less valuable?

I've seen a few comments on a couple different blogs where some people are under the impression that a fair number of Matt Kemp's home runs are hit in less meaningful situations.  For example, clubbing a homer when the team already leads by eight runs isn't really all that crucial, but hitting a two-run HR in the bottom of an extra-inning while trailing by one is huge.

I doubt I can come to a complete conclusion on how meaningful Matt Kemp's home runs are, because I either lack the time to collect enough data, or I just don't understand how to find the data I want quickly, but here is a little analysis that can at least push us towards a tentative statement on the effectiveness of his homers.

The fantastic baseball-reference.com provides easy access to a home run log for every player ever.  For example, here is Matt Kemp's home run log.  Notice that there is a column labeled "bWPA".  This stands for "Batting Team's Win Probability Added".  If you point at it, the pop-up balloon reads "Given average teams, this is the change in probability of the batting team winning the game from the start of this play to the end of the play."  For example, the first HR of Kemp's career changed the Dodgers win probability from 54% to 79% for a bWPA of 25%.  In essence, this is an attempt to measure how much this one swing of the bat affected this game.

I wish I could tell you what the average bWPA for a home run in the 2009 National League was, or for the 2009 Dodgers, but, alas, I couldn't figure out how to obtain that data.  But I did check the home run logs for the top five Dodger home run hitters of 2009 (Andre Ethier, Matt Kemp, Manny Ramirez, Casey Blake, James Loney) and the 2009 home run log for Albert Pujols, to get an idea of the kinds of numbers we might see.  Perhaps this is too simplistic, but I merely averaged the bWPA for each players 2009 home runs to see how much, on the average, that player's homers increased his team's chances of winning.  The table below show each player's bWPA per home run for 2009.

Player bWPA/HR
Ethier 17.3%
Kemp 12.4%
Manny 13.2%
Blake 18.6%
Loney 13.3%
Pujols 13.0%

 

Well, 12.4% is the lowest number in this group, but it is a lot closer to those three samples in the low 13% area than those 13%s are to the higher two samples.  Until we know what league averages are like, we can't make definitive conclusions, but I'll hazard a guess that Kemp's home runs are somewhere around typical in meaningfulness, on the average, and that Blake and Ethier are "clutchier" than typical, on the average.  And who would have guessed that Blake's average would be higher than Andre "Mr. Four Walk-off HRs" Ethier?

Comment 74 comments  |  3 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Kemp ranks 14th in the majors in WPA/LI.

According to David Appleman,

“Unlike standard linear weights, WPA/LI does take into account the situation. So at times when a walk would be just as valuable as a home run, WPA/LI accurately weights the walk and the home run, where linear weights would still give .13 wins to the home run and the walk .03 wins.”

So as I understand it, he is doing very well in a statistic that doesn’t give extra credit for homers in blowouts.

by fritts on Sep 17, 2009 8:02 PM PDT reply actions  

When I was "researching" this post

I saw the WPA/LI stat on fangraphs, which I found quite interesting, but since I was attempting to answer the specific question about home runs, I filed that away for future investigation and moved on. Never did find a WPA mapping of home runs there.

by David Young on Sep 18, 2009 9:53 AM PDT up reply actions  

matt kemp has hit a lot of meaning homers this year… i can think of many that gave us the lead….

whoever says they are meaningless probably saw one homer or something where it was a blowout and comes up with the dumb conclusion of matt kemp hits meaningless homers

by matthewmafa on Sep 17, 2009 8:14 PM PDT reply actions  

Like in the most recent game played. A two-run HR when you’re down by one in the bottom of the sixth puts a decent upper on the team’s WPA. Here it is graphically from fangraphs:

Side note: check out the loss in WPA on JP’s CS at 3rd for the first out.

by David Young on Sep 18, 2009 9:57 AM PDT up reply actions  

Nice and interesting post.

If you go to Kemp’s HR log at Baseball Reference you can see more details as to the situation and score when he hit his HRs.

HRs hit when ahead by 3 runs or less: 5
HRs hit when tied: 8
HRs hit when down by 3 runs or less: 3

So out of 24 home runs hit this year (and counting), 16 of them have been in situations where the Dodgers have been either leading by 3 runs or less, tied, or trailing by three runs or less. So 66% of his HRs have been in situations that I would consider meaningful.

In comparison, here are Ethier’s numbers:

HRs hit when ahead by 3 runs or less: 7
HRs hit when tied: 13
HRs hit when down by 3 runs or less: 7

Out of 30 HRs hit, 27 of them were hit with the Dodgers either ahead by 3 runs or less, tied, or down by 3 runs or less, which means that 90% of his HRs have been hit in meaningful situations. That’s amazing.

Just for fun, here’s a look at Pujols’ numbers for the year:

HRs hit when ahead by 3 runs or less: 10
HRs hit when tied: 16
HRs hit when down by 3 runs or less: 13

Out of 47 HRs on the season, 39 of his HRs have been hit with his team either ahead by 3 runs or less, tied, or behind by 3 runs or less. That means 83% of his HRs have been hit in meaningful situations.

Granted the method I used to determine if the HRs were hit in meaningful situations is pretty rudimentary, but I think it sheds light on the situation. I guess what we can conclude from this is that Kemp has room to improve, just like Pujols does, and Ethier is near perfect. :)

You wanna know how great baseball is? The greatest basketball player ever left his sport to play baseball.

by Jesse S. on Sep 17, 2009 9:00 PM PDT reply actions  

That’s essentially a coarser version of my “analysis”. “Situation and score” are large factors in WPA.

I suggest that your approach is probably too coarse to draw conclusions from. For example, if you’re down four and you hit a grand slam to tie, or a three-run HR to get within one, or probably even a two-run HR to cut the lead to two early in the game, that’s pretty meaningful.

by David Young on Sep 18, 2009 10:02 AM PDT up reply actions  

Yeah that’s true. I had thought about that but it was too much work for me :).

You wanna know how great baseball is? The greatest basketball player ever left his sport to play baseball.

by Jesse S. on Sep 18, 2009 3:44 PM PDT up reply actions  

and just for fun, here are Casey Blake's numbers

HRs hit when ahead by 3 runs or less: 6
HRs hit when tied: 3
HRs hit when down by 3 runs or less: 6

Out of 17 HRs on the season, 15 of his HRs have been hit with his team either ahead by 3 runs or less, tied, or behind by 3 runs or less. That means 88% of his HRs have been hit in meaningful situations.

by Connector on Sep 18, 2009 1:26 AM PDT reply actions  

Forget Numbers

sometimes i get so frustrated with baseball stats.

the fact is that every time kemp hits a homerun, it gives opposing pitchers that much more to worry about when facing him, and the guys before him and after him. he’s fast enough that you don’t want him on base and he’s got enough power that you don’t want to face him with men-on.

i know that sounds simplistic, but i really believe it. as a team the Dodgers are pretty low on the totem pole as far as homeruns, but as a core part of the lineup, it helps to have a pitcher thinking about kemp when they’re facing ethier and manny, or to have used up better pitches on kemp when facing the guys after him.

by bearface on Sep 18, 2009 9:57 AM PDT reply actions  

Would you believe this blog actually evolved from a blog called "Dodger Math"?

I agree with you. But when you see comments that Matt Kemp hits a bunch of meaningless HRs made based only on (possibly biased and likely casual) observation, I prefer to counter with factual data.

Personally, I don’t care what the score is, I will never pooh-pooh offensive production. Russell Martin’s two-run HR off Brad Penny didn’t affect the game outcome much, but we ain’t throwing that one back, right? ;)

by David Young on Sep 18, 2009 10:06 AM PDT up reply actions  

History

It was DePodesta For President before Dodger Math. Before that it was an untitled discussion of men’s hair coloring tips and tricks.

by Andrew Shimmin on Sep 21, 2009 12:13 PM PDT up reply actions  

Its Something That's Always Flustered Me

1. because i can’t keep up with it

2. because i hate the reliance on it – especially from play callers or color commenters.

3. because they are so absurd sometimes

(Did you know that Furcal’s BA jumps 17 points when facing left handed relievers between the age of 27 and 30 during day games on monday through thursday in parks that face towards the north-west?)

4. and finally because they are used to explain things that they don’t necessarily explain. the fact that guy X hits for a better average with RISP doesn’t mean that he’s trying to do better there than in another situation. it just means that things have worked out better – its my assumption (maybe this is naive) that any professional baseball player is going to do whatever they can to get a base hit in every single at bat, regardless of the situation.

by bearface on Sep 18, 2009 11:02 AM PDT reply actions  

BearFace

As El Lay Dave said the previous blogger for this website came from a blog called “DodgerMath” and Eric/Brendan have kept that part of the blog going. I’m not really sure you can be a fan of True Blue if you poo poo statistics since that is a good part of any analysis that is done here. For the most part we outright reject the subjective comments that Broxton can’t close because he doesn’t have the “eye of the tiger” when he takes the mound.

by meercatjohn on Sep 18, 2009 11:30 AM PDT up reply actions  

That's Fine

Then I’ll have to ignore that stuff when I feel like its not important to me. I’d rather watch Ethier hit another walk off than discuss his OPS+. But maybe that’s just me.

by bearface on Sep 18, 2009 11:32 AM PDT up reply actions  

It's not an Ethier/or dichotomy

I like doing both, but I do believe that a fan doesn’t have to pay attention to statistics to enjoy the game. However, such a fan should abstain from sweeping generalizations like Player X hits an empty .300, or such things, because that does require evidence to show whether or not it is true, and that evidence will be .

bearface – I am not claiming that you do such things. You seem pretty reasonable.

by David Young on Sep 18, 2009 12:25 PM PDT up reply actions  

I See What You Did There

Of course its not an either/or. But its still the truth, at least with me. The Dodgers have the best team ERA in baseball, and the best BA in the NL, but not the best record. I’d rather have them win every game and have the worst stats possible.

It almost goes back to what a lot of people were saying around the whole Manny suspsension – I’m routing for the name on the front of the uniform, not the name on the back.

by bearface on Sep 18, 2009 12:46 PM PDT up reply actions  

I don’t know how old you are, but I grew up in an era when kids still handled their baseball cards and read the backs repeatedly. We pored over the major league statistics that were published each week in the Sunday sports section. Paying attention to at least some statistics is ingrained in us at a pretty early age. Of course, it may inherently hold more attraction for me since the word “mathematics” appears somewhere on my college diploma.

by David Young on Sep 18, 2009 1:15 PM PDT up reply actions  

I'm 27

And have a huge box full of baseball cards in my parents attic (the most of notable of which was a Dodgers Target set from sometime in the 90s). If you ask my parents, I used to annoy my friends growing up because I would spout off stats from the LA times while eating cereal instead of wanting to watch cartoons or read the funny section.

That being said, I still get annoyed at the over use of insane stats. I love reading box scores, and i’ll argue the shit out of somebody over slugging percentage or ERA, but when you get into the super detailed situational type stuff it detracts from the game to me.

Like I said, its really when they are used as reasons or excuses that it bothers me…Pythagorean wins, FIP etc.

by bearface on Sep 18, 2009 1:21 PM PDT up reply actions  

So what are you suggesting exactly?

To avoid using statistics as a means of talent evaluation? I would agree, some stats are absurd, which is why I’ve been so pleased with the new metrics in the past 10 years which seemingly provide better information. OPS is better than BA. FIP (and x-FIP) are better than ERA. Whilst we still have a long ways to go WRT defensive metrics, people realize fielding percentage is a flawed stat.

But I’m not really sure what your method would be. Is it your position that since some stats are upsurd that we should stop using stats to justify perfomance, assign value and predict future performance? That’s throwing the baby out with the bath water. You may not like stats, but they provide objective information as opposed to looking into a players eyes and knowing they are a gamer.

by Michael White on Sep 18, 2009 11:14 AM PDT up reply actions  

Yikes

No. I never said not to use stats, or that they aren’t useful. What I am saying is that they are often used to explain the reasoning behind something, or used as an excuse. As a fan who enjoys watching and living the game, I could give a shit what the dodger’s pythagorean win-loss record is, I only care what the real thing is.

Same thing goes with FIP – its essentially used to show what the pitchers ERA would be without the fielding behind them, but guess what – the same guys that have been out there all year are still there. Its a team sport. If you want to use it for Cy Young voting, be my guest, but why would you use an adjusted stat to explain something? You would only use it as an excuse.

My whole point, if you had read above, is that Matt Kemp’s homeruns are important to the team regardless of how clutch they are or when he hits them. Even at relatively tame numbers for Manny (specifically tame for him, not that they are bad) he’s still incredibly valuable to that lineup.

by bearface on Sep 18, 2009 11:29 AM PDT reply actions  

Again I Suck at Computers Today

One last thing – I’ll put it this way. Kobe Bryant is the best player on the Lakers. Derek Fischer is the most clutch. Would the Lakers have won the NBA Finals without Kobe on the team? No. Even though he doesn’t always hit the big shots at the right time, he does enough that it has an effect. Same thing goes for Kemp. He might not hit the big clutch home-runs, but without him they’re missing a lot.

by bearface on Sep 18, 2009 11:34 AM PDT up reply actions  

Now that is right on the nose.

Besides, Kobe is clutch, just that D Fischer is not that good and so when he wins a game it is always amazing. Robert Horry and D Fischer might have been the most average players to ever win so many playoff games on big time shots near the end of regulation or overtime.

by meercatjohn on Sep 18, 2009 11:39 AM PDT up reply actions  

I do understand where you are coming from

Sometimes the statistics get in the way of simply enjoying the beauty of the game. When watching a game at the stadium I try not to think about the numbers and just concentrate on the game itself. I can enjoy a lousy hitter like Castro driving a shot to right to drive in Ausmus while at the game.

When I’m not at the game, it will drive me nuts to see that Juan Castro is even on the team based on the historical statistics.

I love the game of baseball, and I love the statistics that baseball generates. Sometimes one gets in the way of the other and I will say I’m unable to enjoy baseball now the way I did as a kid when I didn’t know how lousy some of my hero’s actually were.

by meercatjohn on Sep 18, 2009 11:37 AM PDT up reply actions  

Sometimes one gets in the way of the other and I will say I’m unable to enjoy baseball now the way I did as a kid when I didn’t know how lousy some of my hero’s actually were.

Tell it like it is John, tell it like it is..

by PHAT JULIO on Sep 18, 2009 12:25 PM PDT up reply actions  

Same thing goes with FIP – its essentially used to show what the pitchers ERA would be without the fielding behind them, but guess what – the same guys that have been out there all year are still there. Its a team sport.

Um, except that players get traded. Notice how Jarrod Washburn’s ERA has gone through the roof since joining the Tigers and no longer playing with the best defense behind him? And the posters at this website called it. There’s a reason we were all screaming to not trade for Washburn.

by Michael White on Sep 18, 2009 11:38 AM PDT up reply actions  

Seattle

has a great defensive outfield, the infield is kind of crappy. He didn’t have Beltre or Jack Wilson for much of the year and he had Branyan and Lopes on the right side all year. Is he strictly a fly ball pitcher?

by meercatjohn on Sep 18, 2009 11:41 AM PDT up reply actions  

Not sure. I just remember that at the deadline the delta from his x-FIP to ERA was pretty significant.

I’ll look into his batted ball stats.

by Michael White on Sep 18, 2009 11:49 AM PDT up reply actions  

RE: Fly Ball pitcher

Washburn FB% is 42.80% which is 71st (the higher the rank the higher the percentage) out of 81 listed on Fangraphs.

Kershaw’s is higher at 43%.

http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=pit&lg=all&qual=y&type=2&season=2009&month=0

by Michael White on Sep 18, 2009 11:53 AM PDT up reply actions  

The Trade Deadline Has Passed

if you want to use FIP to figure out weather the Dodgers should sign/trade for somebody in the off season be my guest. if you’re using it to figure out Wolf’s value to the Dodgers in the post-season, that’s just a little much.

by bearface on Sep 18, 2009 11:51 AM PDT up reply actions  

Why is that a little much?

Do you think Wolf aims where the ball is going to travel off the bat? Or is there luck involved there? Strikeout pitchers control their environment more. But if batters are hitting you, there is an element of luck involved— either the ball is hit at somebody, or its not.

Phil knew that Cory Wade’s ERA was a result of good luck because his FIP was high and his ERA was unsustainably low. And he was right.

I think Wolf’s numbers have been positively impacted by good luck (as has Kershaw.)

by Michael White on Sep 18, 2009 11:57 AM PDT up reply actions  

But I also thought

Cory Wade did not have very good stuff, and I don’t think that of Wolf/Kershaw.

by meercatjohn on Sep 18, 2009 12:01 PM PDT up reply actions  

Keep in mind that Wade was hurt a lot this year.

He also was demoted and promoted a lot because of the plethora of relief pitchers on the club. I still think he is going to be a useful reliever.

by Ian Capilouto on Sep 18, 2009 1:06 PM PDT up reply actions  

But I believe he was judging Wade’s stuff last year.

by David Young on Sep 18, 2009 1:09 PM PDT up reply actions  

Yeah on one year where maybe his peripherals weren't great

but the results were there. This year, he was hurt and went from pitching well in big time situations in the playoffs last year, to AAA. The combo of being hurt plus the demotions may have contributed greatly to him having a down year. I like to consider the stat aspects with the human aspects in my evaluation of players.

by Ian Capilouto on Sep 18, 2009 1:20 PM PDT up reply actions  

Whatever Wolf and Kershaw Have Done

At Dodger Stadium, or away from Dodger Stadium, with this particular set of ball-players behind them has worked out pretty well. This will be the same group of guys that’s behind them in the post-season. They will be throwing the same pitches as they’ve been throwing.

So anybody who’s ever been a ground-out guy or a pop-up guy has only relied on luck ?

by bearface on Sep 18, 2009 12:26 PM PDT up reply actions  

I don’t think anybody would say that a groundball pitcher relies on luck solely. Getting groundouts is something that certain pitchers can control more than others. But what happens when there’s a hit and run and a grounder that would normally be fielded finds a hole? What about a situation like there was Wednesday when someone (I think it was Kemp) hits the ball on the screws but lines out because the fielder is moving toward the ball to cover a hit and run?

One situation is lucky and the other is unlucky. There’s the old bit of baseball wisdom that these things even out during a season, but unfortunately life isn’t always fair and they don’t always even out. That’s why some metrics try to take the element of luck out of the equation when evaluating how good a pitcher is.

by Sam PHL on Sep 18, 2009 12:42 PM PDT up reply actions  

here here!

“What I am saying is that they are often used to explain the reasoning behind something, or used as an excuse. As a fan who enjoys watching and living the game, I could give a shit what the dodger’s pythagorean win-loss record is, I only care what the real thing is.”

Yeah, I definitely agree with some extra usage of stats for evaluating things like whether Washburn was the real deal or not (obviously, he wasn’t). But when I see some in the Sabermetrics crowd try to explain how Theo Epstein used Moneyball principles to beat the Yankees in 2004, I wonder why they we didn’t hear about these theories when the Yankees were up 3 games to 0, and leading in the 8th inning of game 4. In other words, baseball stats today seem to be extremely over used at times to justify things that have already happened, which a) takes away from the fun of the game, b) is just LAME!

by sarcastro9 on Sep 18, 2009 2:00 PM PDT up reply actions  

He used those principles

to evaluate players and get more bang for his buck than the Yankees did.

The argument wasn’t “well shit, moneyball made the Red Sox come back from 3-0”.

The Pythagorean win loss record is important because it shows regression or true talent level. Teams are likely to regress to that record. You think it’s a coincidence most teams are within 2-3 games of their pythag?

Bill Plaschke sackrode the Angels last year and pummeled the Dodgers. Though you could tell the teams were more similar than he could have imagined if you looked at the pythag.

by Chad Moriyama on Sep 18, 2009 2:04 PM PDT up reply actions  

When the only complaint is that your homers are "meaningless"

then you’re a pretty good player. I’ll take Matt’s 24 “meaningless” homers, thanks.

I recall that this was one of the few arguments people made against A-Rod…

by Sam PHL on Sep 18, 2009 12:21 PM PDT reply actions  

Roto players love those meaningless home runs and steals.

I’d say the home run he hit on Wednesday was very very meaningful.

by meercatjohn on Sep 18, 2009 12:24 PM PDT reply actions  

Meaningful or not...

Nobody should criticize anyone’s home runs. Those players are up there for 9 innings to do their job, which is to win the game. Are you going to criticize a guy doing his job by putting up more runs for his team so they have a better chance of winning? Why is it meaningless for Matt to hit one when we’re winning by like 8 runs in the eighth inning? Is it meaningless to Matt? To the Dodgers? To us? We love these moments. When it does happen, we rave about it, it is meaningful. BISON POWER, BISON BOMB, what have you.

by PHAT JULIO on Sep 18, 2009 12:37 PM PDT reply actions  

I agree with you.

In my last paragraph, I probably should have used “the effect on the outcome of the game, win/loss,” instead of “meaningfulness”, as that is my point in my counterargument against those who would speak of “empty home runs”.

by David Young on Sep 18, 2009 1:08 PM PDT up reply actions  

I agree with this. While it may be debatable whether or not a Bison Bomb hit when the Dodgers are up by 10 runs is meaningful or not to the Dodgers as a team, IMO every HR by Kemp will be beneficial to his development and thereby not worthless.

You wanna know how great baseball is? The greatest basketball player ever left his sport to play baseball.

by Jesse S. on Sep 18, 2009 1:57 PM PDT up reply actions  

My opinion on this subject(s)

is that I like stats and how they can predict things to a certain extent. They make the game interesting in a different way then just enjoying it for being a ball game. I enjoy both and see the value in both. My problem with stat people and traditional baseball people is this; Most refuse to see the merit in both sides arguments. It is like politics at its worst.
Stats are useful and can predict things to a certain extent and should be used when evaluating players and signings. But, I also think there is a reason certain players are considered “gamers.” In a high leverage situation, I would hope that Broxton or BIlls can reach back and get that strikeout against the opponents big hitters. Some people do have personalities that react better in big game situations. Same things goes in all aspects of life.

by Ian Capilouto on Sep 18, 2009 1:16 PM PDT reply actions  

If a player is a better than average performer in high leverage situations, you will see it statistically, if the sample size is big enough, and depending on the definition of high leverage.

(If high leverage means playoff type atmosphere, the sample size is almost always going to be small. Even Mariano Rivera’s post-season experience is only about one season’s worth of appearances (and 1.5 seasons worth of IP); Derek Jeter’s post-season totals are about 70% of a full season for him.)

by David Young on Sep 18, 2009 1:33 PM PDT up reply actions  

What I am getting at....

is that I think personality does play a role in reaction and dealing with certain situations, on a general, broad level. Which would lead me to beleive that it has some kind of influence in baseball too.
The example of Jeter and Rivera is interesting because those two guys probably have the most post season stats over anybody else around by far.?

by Ian Capilouto on Sep 18, 2009 1:55 PM PDT up reply actions  

I picked Rivera and Jeter because I thought, off the top of my head, that they would be among the leaders in post-season IP and PA, respectively, and still have a relatively small sample size.

by David Young on Sep 18, 2009 2:28 PM PDT up reply actions  

I give merit to both sides

Fact is, most people play to their skill level.

Derek Jeter’s clutch reputation? Hey look at his postseason stats and compare it to his career line.

Amazing, right?

by Chad Moriyama on Sep 18, 2009 1:35 PM PDT up reply actions  

Problem with relying on WPA, etc

Is that it only measures value in the moment, but is not necessarily indicative of a skill.

Is it really a player’s fault if he can only hit solo home runs if nobody is on base? Is it necessarily a skill to be able to pop 3 run homers in close games as opposed to solo homers with a 5 run lead?

To me, it just reflects on a player’s overall skill set. They have a certain talent level and they will repeat this over the long run, whether or not they do it in “meaningful” situations is generally randomized.

Ironically, the people railing against statistics because of studies like this agree with what most sabermetricans believe. Yes, it’s all valuable.

Maybe if you bothered to understand that, you wouldn’t be so bigoted about it.

by Chad Moriyama on Sep 18, 2009 1:40 PM PDT reply actions  

But the point is I am trying to counter-argue a claim about value in the moment, so WPA is exactly the right thing to use here.

by David Young on Sep 18, 2009 2:26 PM PDT up reply actions  

By the way

To say the people who enjoy statistics were thinking “well shit, the probability of this happening against isn’t likely and WPA indicates this isn’t a skill” during the 4+1 game is really dumb.

As if you can’t enjoy the game and think big picture at the same time or something. Really? Why not? I can’t enjoy watching somebody pitch and realize “hey, this guy is probably going to be shit next year so don’t get excited, broseph”.

Bah.

by Chad Moriyama on Sep 18, 2009 1:44 PM PDT reply actions  

I agree

This is also a big reason I greatly enjoy Tim Kurkjian’s spots on ESPN. He usually gives a ton of meaningful stats, then shows some clip of something fun and then says something like, “You’ve gotta love this game!”

He reminds me of how Peter Gammons was over ten years ago before he got very lazy and got addicted to the easy TV money.

by Seanny Rotten on Sep 18, 2009 2:01 PM PDT up reply actions  

It is hard for me to give good, well thought out responses today

because I am in a high leverage situation at work right now. I would rather be talking baseball and this discussion but I have to deal with this fucking place.

by Ian Capilouto on Sep 18, 2009 2:02 PM PDT reply actions  

Moneyball is whatever Joe Morgan wants it to be

Until he actually cracks open the cover and realizes it is just a book

by mr_blond on Sep 18, 2009 4:44 PM PDT up reply actions  

Does Ethier have a nickname?

Dre doesn’t count since it is just a short version of his name. Any suggestions?

by mr_blond on Sep 18, 2009 4:47 PM PDT reply actions  

Endre is a popular nickname around here.

You wanna know how great baseball is? The greatest basketball player ever left his sport to play baseball.

by Jesse S. on Sep 18, 2009 4:52 PM PDT up reply actions  

pronouced END drey

I believe this originally came from some dumb east coast writer who misspelled Andre’s name, but with his propensity for ending games with his swing it fits quite nicely. Although I am sure his teammates have some different moniker for him

by MammothDodger on Sep 18, 2009 5:07 PM PDT up reply actions  

Wow!

Great article! It’s articles like these that make me love TBLA! I would love to see more stats in this regard! Thanks so much!

by Yodasbrthr on Sep 18, 2009 5:45 PM PDT reply actions  

Dave, I was mostly away today, but just got to see this article. Very, very well done. Good work.

by Eric Stephen on Sep 18, 2009 11:01 PM PDT reply actions  

stats or no stats

Anyone who dares besmirch the good name of one Matthew Ryan Kemp deserves to get tarred, feathered, and run out of town in quarters.

by ishXdavid on Sep 20, 2009 8:25 PM PDT reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

A place for Dodger fans to congregate without spending $15 on parking.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

100_1427_small
Great Scott and Jolting Josie
N1209328_7139_small
True Blue Los Angeles Fantastical Base Ball League
100_1427_small
Dodger Blogger Softball Tourney Update

Recent FanPosts

Small
TBLA Fantasy Baseball: Mountain Edition
Kemp_small
All-star predictions
Img_0247_small
Dodgers.com might have a job opening...
Small
Law Ranks Dodger System #12
Small
DODGERS -- 2 GREAT SEATS FOR SALE
Small
Joe Torre Horrow Show
2011-philly-game-me__2__small
2011 Dodgers Spreadsheet Project

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

2012 Dodgers Payroll

Italics denote estimates
Pos No Player 2012 Salary
C 17 Ellis $500,000 team control
1B 7 Loney $6,375,000
2B 14 Ellis $2,500,000
3B 5 Uribe $8,000,000
SS 9 Gordon $485,000 team control
LF 21 Rivera $4,000,000
CF 27 Kemp $10,000,000
RF 16 Ethier $10,950,000

IF/OF 6 Hairston $2,250,000
OF 10 Gwynn $850,000
2B/3B 3 Kennedy $800,000
C 18 Treanor $850,000
IF 12 Sellers $485,000 team control

SP 22 Kershaw $6,000,000
SP 58 Billingsley $9,000,000
SP 29 Lilly $12,000,000
SP 35 Capuano $3,000,000
SP 44
Harang $3,000,000

CL 54 Guerra $485,000 team control
RHP 74
Jansen $500,000 team control
RHP 55 Guerrier $4,750,000
RHP 60 Coffey $1,000,000
RHP 66 MacDougal $650,000
LHP 57 Elbert $485,000 team control
RHP 36
Hawksworth $500,000 team control

TJ 41 De La Rosa $485,000 team control



Manny $8,087,432 deferred


Andruw $3,375,000 deferred


Pierre $3,050,000 deferred
Furcal $3,000,000 deferred
Kuroda $2,000,000 deferred
Garland $1,500,000 option buyout
Blake $1,250,000 option buyout

Totals
$112,162,432

For more detailed information, click here.

Players on 40-man roster used as roster
fillers until moves are made.

Current 40-man roster count: 40
(not including Belisario)

2012 Non-Roster Invitees

No Player Age*
63 Jose Ascanio rhp
27
61 Alberto Castillo lhp
36
56 Matt Chico lhp
29
33 John Grabow lhp
33
59 Angel Guzman rhp
30
47 Wil Ledezma lhp
31
72 Shane Lindsay rhp
27
62 Fernando Nieve rhp 29
73 Scott Rice lhp 30
70 Will Savage rhp
27
71 Ryan Tucker rhp
25
28 Jamey Wright rhp
37

30 Josh Bard c 34
82 Griff Erickson c 24
81 Matt Wallachc 26
67 Jeff Baisley 3b/1b 29
65 Luis Cruz ss/2b 28
37 Josh Fields 3b 29
64 Lance Zawadzki if 27
56 Cory Sullivan of 32

*Age on June 30, 2012

NRI count: 20

For more info, click here.


Manager

Eric___ned___reporters_2011_trade_deadline_small Eric Stephen

Editors

100_1427_small Phil Gurnee

Dgy_small David Young

Hanauma_bay_small Chad Moriyama

2501_small Michael White

Raptors_small Brandon Lennox