The Orioles have gotten some really clutch performances this year, exemplified by Taylor Teagarden. I take a look at who's made the most of their production this year over at CamdenDepot; check it out.

no comments

The Orioles splitting their four-game series with the Yankees in Baltimore was not ideal - it left them a game back in the AL East - but is was more or less the expected result given that New York is the better team but the O's had home-field advantage. Both victories for the team came in exciting fashion, perhaps especially the second one in which a hobbled Mark Teixeira slid into first-base attempting to beat a double play ball in the 9th - making it - but being called out to end the game. That win was bitter-sweet though, as earlier Nick Markakis was hit on the hand by a CC Sabathia pitch. Getting the W in the game but losing one of their best players for the rest of the regular season (and likely most, if not all, of any potential play-off run) is a trade-off I saw many people mentioning as essentially worthwhile (given that one decent but not outstanding player just isn't going to contribute much over the course of games).

Instead of looking at what Markakis' loss does to the team, I'll point you to Camden Depot's nice break-down of the changes; bottom line, it's something like 0.4 to 0.75 wins. In a close pennant race, that's certainly nothing to scoff at. But picking up a game on the Yankees due to the blown call* is a full win! Or was it?

* Replay please.

The situation: runners on first and third, one out, Yankees down by one in the top of the ninth. Teixeira hits a grounder to the second-baseman, throw to shortstop covering, relay to first to get Tex. If he beats the throw to first then the run counts. Some people seem to be viewing the difference between a "safe" and an "out" as the difference between a loss and a win, but it's clearly not close to that.

If Teixeira is safe, then the game is tied and there are two outs with a runner on first. The generic win expectancy for a home team in that situation is ~57%. With two outs it's unlikely the opposing team will score again, and the O's would only need one run to end the game in their favor in the bottom of the frame. Maybe you want to give the Yankees a bump for having A-Rod and Robby Cano coming up, but Jim Johnson is no slouch on the mound.

So the blown call probably benefited the Orioles by somewhere around 0.4 to 0.45 wins. That's right around the lower part of the estimate of the loss of Nick Markakis. Given that, I'd gladly trade a hand protector for Nick for a pair of glasses for the first-base ump. But that's not the universe we live in, so the O's are going to have to mix-and-match to keep things going (at least rosters are expanded now). The team's made a lot out of not all that much all season, so I wouldn't count on that to come to a halt now. It is a tougher climb though.

Haven't done one of these in a while, but I also hadn't been to the park in a couple months. It was fortunate that the Orioles started Joe Saunders yesterday (I've had arguments with people regarding Saunders not definitely being better than Tommy Hunter, and he didn't help those people with his first O's start), so I was able to see Zach Britton pitch instead.

The Good:

• Zach Britton was excellent - especially his slider. He kept the ball on the ground while also easily setting a career high in strikes (was 7). No walks plus groundballs plus missing bats (most of the K's were swinging) is generally going to result in some success. Final line; 8 IP, 7 H, 1 R, 0 BB, 10 K.
• Nick Markakis doubled and walked, pushing his wRC+ to 123 on the season (just above 2007's 122, but still well short of that great 2008's 137).
• Adam Jones crushed the 101st home run of his career (26th on the season).
• Mark Reynolds pulled a Markakis with a two-bagger and a free pass, and pushed his batting line into above average territory (101 wRC+). Might even be at replacement level now (-0.1 fWAR coming into the game).
• Taylor Teagarden showed off his one skill at the plate in his first at bat, lifting what seemed like a medium-depth flyball over the scoreboard in right-field. Later he it another one deep, but sent it to center so it only resulted in a double.

The Bad:

• Manny Machado went 0-3 with a strike-out, and hasn't really done anything since hitting 3 home runs early after his call-up. Not fair to judge him harshly for it given his age and his promotion straight from Double-A to the Majors. He "looks" pretty good out there - I think he'll be a quality Major Leaguer in the not too distant future, but doesn't appear to be there yet. On the bright side, at least, he's not chasing too many pitches out of the strike-zone. Lots of swings and misses though.
• Not that it really mattered, but Pedro Strop "allowed" 2 run when he came on in the 9th. At the start of the inning I said "O's ahead by 4, which means I expect Strop to give up 2-3 runs now." Yep. Two hits put runners on, and then Jim Johnson came in (allowed the runners to score), but locked down the save (he now has more of those - 41 - than the Astros have wins - 40). Another two-run win. Of the (now) 8 games in which Strop has given up a run, the O's have still won 6.
• The (presumably drunk) idiot in front of the press-box who yelled (loudly, and irritatingly) for the entire game. Someone said they could hear him on the TV broadcast. Just reduces the enjoyment factor from being at the park.

The Final:

The Orioles win again, and take 3 of 4 from the White Sox (the division leading White Sox, I should say). The O's are now in position to knock the Yankees out of sole possession of first place in the East (while ascending there themselves) in their series in New York. I'm not even sure how to handle that though.

A lot has been made this year (including by me) about the Orioles' run differential (bad) not matching up with their actual record (good). The O's have been outscored by 45 runs, which would indicate that they should be more like 57-66 than 66-57 - and their other non-W-L stats back up that kind of view (below average offense, poor defense, OK pitching-staff). It's the wins and losses that count though, and the team has already banked enough of them - however they got them - that they're actually in position for a play-off spot.

The run differential thing is pretty weird though. The Orioles have absolutely dominated in close games; when the margin of victory has been one run, they're 23-6 (easily the best record in the Majors); and when the margin of victory has been two runs, they're 20-12. In all other games the team is just 24-39.

Quick aside for some stuff I thought was interesting while looking at this:

The O's haven't even played a ton of close games in general; the 29 overall one-run games is the 5th fewest in the AL, and below the league average of 31+. If they could only (a) engineer more close games, and (b) continue their crazy success in them, then they could actually approach 90 wins.

Either the O's win a close one, or they lose - not surprising given the above records. The degree to which this has been true is a little staggering though; they've won by what seems like a reasonable 4 runs only twice all year, which is often as the team has been blown out by 12 runs.

Sixes have been somewhat lucky, as the team has also dominated when that has been the margin of victory (10-4). They've won as many times by exactly 6 runs as they have when coming out ahead by 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, etc. runs... combined.

There is something to be said for the bullpen having a lot to do with the team's success. Buck Showalter has done a nice job leveraging the better relievers, having Pedro Strop and Jim Johnson pitching in closer games while throwing Kevin Gregg out there in mop-up duty. In that way, if the O's are ahead by a little, they can keep that lead - and once the fall too far behind, it really doesn't matter how much more out of hand the game gets. For example;

Jim Johnson has one of the worse ERAs in the pen at 3.08, but over half of the runs he's allowed this season have come in two games (5 against the Twins in what turned out to be a 19-7 loss, and 6 against the A's that ended 14-9). Otherwise he's been a shutdown reliever coming in for high leverage innings. No pansy stuff either; 36 of his 39 entrances in save situations have been with leads of 1 or 2 runs, and he's actually come in to tie games more often than in games where the O's were ahead by 3 runs.

The opening act for JJ has usually been Pedro Strop and his 1.46 ERA. He generally appears in the 8th with a 1 or 2 run O's lead, and then passes that off to Johnson for the save. I wouldn't mind seeing him get his strike-out to walk ratio above 2, but the run prevention has been great (as evidences by his team best 3.0 pitching brWAR).

Beyond that, even when Strop and JJ have given up runs it's rarely mattered. A lot of that is fluky - Johnson comes in with a two-run lead and gives up one, but still gets the save. In fact, of the 7 games in which Strop gave up a run, the O's still went on to win 5 of them; and of the 8 games in which JJ gave up a run, the O's still won 6 of them.

On the other side, there's Kevin Gregg, who has the worst ERA in the pen for guys with at least 20 IP (3.99). He's pitched in 35 games; of those, the O's won 8 (three by 3 runs or more) and lost 27 (22 by 3 runs or more). Amusingly, of the 8 wins, in half Gregg only came in because the game went into extra innings. Generally speaking, the guy who's done the most regular damage to the team's run differential is the one being kept away from important games at all costs (the average leverage index when Gregg's entered a ballgame has been around 0.5).

The other top relievers - Darren O'Day and Troy Patton - are right there with Strop when it comes to pitching in close games (percent of appearances where the score differences was two or less: O'Day; 65%, Strop; 63%, Patton; 60%), but they tend to show up more with the game tied or the O's just behind. So that's a relatively deep stable of pitchers having very good years that are available to either turn slim leads into close wins or keep things tight enough for the O's to come back (for a close win).

Certainly other teams get the whole "use better pitchers at higher leverage times" thing, but perhaps the Orioles have more opportunities to use it to their advantage because of the in and out starting pitching (sometimes they're good and the top part of the pen can work, and sometimes they're really, really not, and then we get to see Captain Chaos). The O's have allowed 6+ runs in 36% of their games (compared to 31% as the Major League average), while also allowing 2 or fewer runs in 33% of their games (compared to 31% as the Major League average). And the team has taken advantage of those well pitched games, winning a higher than average share (95% versus 87% for all teams).

Another part of it is probably the offensive being below average, since that means fewer blow-outs in the O's favor (they're 16-20 in games decided by 5 or more runs). That makes it harder to get the run differential up since they don't run up the score as often as that gets done against them.

In any case, there's probably at least a little something the Orioles are doing that's helping them turn some middling overall stats into more wins than you'd expect. And it's hard to argue they haven't been very lucky on top of that. It would still be surprising to see them continue winning ~54% of their games going forward, but it's certainly fun while it lasts.

I have to say, I'm not completely enamored with the Orioles calling up Manny Machado today. He's a great prospect - hitting well in Double-A (the .266/.352/.438 line doesn't look earth-shattering, but it's well above average in context as noted by his 122 wRC+) and having only just turned 20 - but, well, he only has a partial season at Double-A and he only just turned 20. I have a hard time imaging Machado is going to provide any sort of significant improvement for the O's down the stretch, especially given his lack of experience at third-base. And his arbitration clock is starting a fair bit earlier than I would have expected.

On the other hand, if the Orioles like Machado enough to think he's got a good chance of being the team's starter at third-base next year, then getting him a little seasoning down the stretch this year makes some sense (assuming he'll be playing more often than not, rather than sitting on the bench). Also, even if Machado doesn't outplay a Robert Andino or a Wilson Betemit, it's possible that having someone who is capable on both sides of the ball (not a stretch to think Manny while be less of a horror at third than Betemit; and there's a non-zero chance he can out-hit Andino, even if I think fans are greatly overstating the probability of it) allows Buck to utilize the roster more effectively overall. To wit:

vs. Left-handed Pitchers:
Wilson Betemit - .145/.226/193 (yikes!)
Mark Reynolds - .280.413/.453

vs. Right-handed Pitchers:
Wilson Betemit - .304/.357/.508
Mark Reynolds - .188/.296/.356

Freeing Betemit from third-base and allowing him and Reynolds to platoon at first (or DH, with Chris Davis at first) can turn the position into one of relative strength for the team. Add a potential Nate McLouth/Lew Ford platoon in left (neither guy is good anymore, but each has been a slightly above average hitter in his career against opposite-handed pitchers), and the line-up on any given night could be decent one. If Betemit spells Machado at third against tougher righties and Andino is around for defense if learning a (somewhat) new position at the Major League level is as hard as it sounds, it could be a small plus.

Given where the Orioles are right now - in the thick of a pennant race based largely on "fluky" success in one-run and extra-inning games, but with less than two months to go (during which their "luck" could certainly hold) - a small plus could be enough. And promoting Machado too early is definitely far less troublesome for the future of the franchise than trading him (or another young player) for a rent-a-vet would be. So while it might have been better to have to be patient about it, I'm excited to see Machado play tonight and hope he can show at least a little something this year.

no comments

The trade deadline has come and gone, with the Orioles (probably correctly) deciding to stand pat. Some thoughts on the non-trades and other things:

Taking Joe Blanton's contract off Philadelphia's hands would have been fine. Having the Phillies pick up most of it and throwing a mediocre prospect their way wouldn't have been the worst either. That they reportedly requested Jon Schoop is, I'm assuming, a joke.

Blanton is a decent enough pitcher; he does have excellent control. Since moving to the NL his strike-out rate has gone up (to above average), though he can be prone to the long-ball (some of that is surely his home ballpark). His 3.60 xFIP over the last three years is actually 25th in the Majors (min. 350 IP). Part of that is his 13.6% home run per flyball rate getting regressed though, and his 4.12 FIP is a far less impressive 69th (and his 4.75 ERA is 95th out of 103). Checking in on Blanton is smart, but with him still being owed $3 M for the rest of this season, I wouldn't expect much (if any) excess value there. And he's a free agent after the season (when he could potentially be signed on the cheap as a back-end starter with some mild upside).

Somewhat doubtful, but maybe Blanton even passes through waivers and the O's can take a crack at him this month.

Chase Headley is a good third-baseman - one I would have been happy to see the Orioles pick up a couple years ago - but with San Diego's high asking price, I'm OK not making that move either.

A lot of Headley's offensive value comes from his walks (10% walk rate career, 13.5% this year) and moving out of Petco doesn't do anything for that. You'd think he'd get more hits, but his career BABIP is .339 as it is so there's probably not much (if any) room for growth there (it is .369 career on the road, but that's not likely to be sustainable). So Headley would hit some more home runs, but I'm not sure how much his production would really improve (relatively speaking). And above-average hitting third-baseman who's also a plus on defense (+9 UZR/150 career, +8 DRS/150) is a quality player - perhaps one bringing $30 M in value above his salary to his team through 2014 (he has two more arbitration years left).

Is that worth Jake Arrieta AND 2-3 good prospects? Arrieta's 6.13 ERA this year is ugly, and he's not exactly tearing it up in Triple-A (7 K/9, 3.8 BB/9, 3.78 ERA), but his 4.03 ERA and 3.83 xFIP point to a potentially above average starter. Four years of control of an average-ish starting pitcher is pretty valuable - perhaps worth as much as Headley straight up. I'd have probably gone through with that, and maybe included one prospect (but not multiples, or one of the O's best). It might even make more sense to pick Headley up after the season instead of now, as his 2012 production doesn't likely mean a great deal to the Orioles (I'm still not confident they end up higher than 5th place in the East) and he might come cheaper no in the middle of a pennant race.

The O's were linked to a number of relievers, but managed to avoid the stupidity that is a middle-of-the-road team trading prospects for guys who will maybe throw 20 innings the rest of the year. The current bullpen was well assembled (Jim Johnson: converted mediocre starting pitching prospect, Pedro Strop: trading away an expensive and not very good Mike Gonzalez, Darren O'Day/Luis Ayala: cheap free agent pick-ups, Troy Patton: extra piece in a trade for a quickly becoming over-priced Miguel Tejada (Luke Scott was good return by himself) - the worst relievers in the pen this year came from moves that looked bad at the time, in Kevin Gregg and Dana Eveland*). It would be a shame to mess up one of the things the team has done well.

* Tyler Hanson is batting .271/.378/.486 in Triple-A for LA this year, while Jarrett Martin is striking out a batter per inning in A-Ball (though with a 5.6 BB/9). Not mind-blowing numbers, but Eveland did just clear waivers with no team wanting him for free.

The team finally realized that despite being a right-fielder with a big contract, Nick Markakis was probably the team's "best" lead-off hitter. Since coming off the DL and being slotted into that first spot, he's hit .378/.416/.524. The power is a bit lacking and he's only walking 6.7% of the time, but a .363 BABIP combined with exactly 1* strike-out in 89 PA makes up for a lot of things. Markakis is actually having his best offensive season since 2008, and had a chance at 20 home runs if he hadn't gotten hurt. The -9 UZR and -6 DRS (in limited time) are brutal though, sharply cutting into his value. He just doesn't have much range in right, and his arm isn't what it used to be. Maybe it's worth seeing if he can be an asset at first-base next year (not that that will happen, what with his recent Gold Glove and all)?

* It came against Anthony Swarzak of the Twins on July 19th, who actually K'ed the side that inning.

Jim Johnson is fine. He's a groundball pitcher with some occasionally poor infield defense behind him, and he doesn't strike out many batters. Sometimes that leads to giving up a few hits (and, subsequently, runs) in an inning - potentially even in a (gasp!) save situation. He's a good but not amazing closer who benefited from some good luck early in the year and had the pendulum swing the other way recently. The lack of K's is why, even though giving it a try would be fine, converting Johnson into a starter probably wouldn't be as amazing as some people think - I'm not sure how much better he'd be than a Brad Bergesen.

It's a little funny - JJ throws 94-95 and Pedro Strop throws 96-97, and yet their combined strike-out rate is only 11.9 K/9. There are 11 relievers who are beating that by themselves this year (led, of course, by Aroldis Champman and his ridiculous 16.9 K/9) - one of whom is David Hernandez (13 K/9 - boy, has the Mark Reynolds trade been disappointing). Both Johnson and Strop do get a ton groundballs though (they're numbers 2 and 5 in the Majors, min. 40 IP).

One could actually argue that Troy Patton has been the team's best reliever this year, getting K's (8.2 per nine), minimizing free passes (2.1 BB/9), and getting groundballs (48%). His 3.46 xFIP matches Jason Hammel for best on the club, and he's actually been relatively effective against righties (3.84 xFIP) as well as lefties (3.14 xFIP).

Chris Tillman is throwing harder than he has in years - touching 97 and averaging 93 mph with the fastball - and doing it without walking the park (3 BB/9 so far). With his expanded arsenal (fastball, curve, change, cutter, slider), throwing strikes could enable him to turn into an average-ish starter. The extreme flyball tendencies will probably always be a bit of an issue, but if he can get into enough good counts to turn his off-speed stuff into out pitches then he should be able to up the K's (6.8 per nine currently) enough to make up for it. Especially given batters are swinging through the fastball more than they used to.

Adam Jones has sure slowed down, and doesn't look like he'll crack the 5 win barrier this year. He's hit just .268/.308/.464 in June/July after a torrid start, but that's not even that much worse his 2011 numbers. The defensive number on him look bad (-5 UZR, -14 DRS), but when I watch games it still seems like he's getting to more balls than he used to. That's what the stats are for, I guess. Still, ZiPS sees Jones as a 4-ish win player right now (which still makes his contract more than worthwhile unless he declines precipitously).

Matt Wieters has traded off having good/bad months with the bat - 152 wRC+, 64, 123, 56 - which means we should get to enjoy August. Hitting a ton of pop-ups isn't helping, as his BABIP has fallen by 11 points for the second year in a row (to .265 now). Still taking walks, showing some pop, and being great behind the plate though. Wieters probably isn't getting to 5 wins this year either, which I guess means he's a bust.

Chris Davis isn't good. He's been better than I expected (which was below replacement level), but even the extra home runs don't do enough to make up for the lack of walks and the large number of strike-outs. .262/.308/.467 is fine - it's about how well Jones has hit the last two months - but the bar for offense is lower for center-fielders. A 1B/LF/DH needs to do more than that, especially when he's not a good fielder (which Davis isn't). Maybe he turns himself into an average player at some point, but I still don't see it. Mighty strong though.

It was good to see Brian Roberts back, sort of, in that I never thought he'd be healthy enough to play in the Majors again. Even if he made it back though, I was doubtful he'd be any better than Robert Andino. And boy howdy was that part accurate; 17 games, -1.1 fWAR. That's probably the worst production from anyone in baseball this year (min. 70 PA), as everyone who has a worse fWAR had more playing time in which to suck, while Roberts was costing the O's about two-thirds of a run per game relative to even a replacement level player. With labrum surgery ending his 2012, it sounds like Roberts is actually looking to come back for 2013 - but I'm not sure I see the point in that for the team.

The Orioles' run differential is still ugly at -51, but that's pretty much just the Angels and Rangers (-52 in just 13 games). They all count though, and the O's have a below average offense (which has the potential to be average), a poor defense (not really debatable), an uneven rotation, and a solid bullpen. That's not a play-off caliber team, nor would it be even if they had added a Josh Johnson or a Shane Victorino (or whoever). But hey, enjoy the ride while it lasts. And they only need to play like a 72-73 win team the rest of the way to get to .500 (which is good, since that's more or less what their run differential says they are). Given recent history, that would be worth cheering for (even if not worth selling out to go for).

I heard someone on the radio say they're happy to trade Dylan Bundy, Manny Machado, and every other prospect for the Zack Greinkes of the world. You know, because the Orioles are incapable of developing prospects. The thing is, if you think an O's will never turn a prospect into a Major Leaguer then you should quite following the team now - the O's are not the Yankees, and even New York needs some cheap cost controlled players (they can't afford to pay the market rate for all their wins). And people don't seem to understand that you're not just getting a player, but you're getting a contract too. Zack Greinke is great! All else being equal, I'd be fine dealing prospects (who are very unlikely to turn out even close to as good) for him. But all isn't equal; when you trade for Greinke, you only get him for two months. Then, if you want to keep him, you have to give him a whole lot of money (which the Orioles could do after the season anyway, if they were so inclined). That's money that can't be used for something else. Even if you want Peter Angelos to "open the wallet", the team just isn't going to have a $200 M payroll. Just because trying to build through the farm system hasn't worked doesn't mean it can't work - and given the fundamentals of the AL East, they don't actually have a choice but to go that route. Make the big signing/trade when you really are one piece away - not when one piece is only hopefully going to bring you to being one (more) piece away (as they are now).

In an effort to bolster a flailing offense, the Orioles have acquired DH Jim Thome from the Phillies in return for prospects Kyle Simon and Gabriel Lino.

I really like Thome, but he's 41 years old, has no defensive value, and is batting a solid (but not outstanding for a DH) .242/.338/.516 this year. He's also left-handed, as is Chris Davis and (effectively, with his platoon splits) Wilson Betemit. Maybe Thome provides the O's with half a win over replacement the rest of the year, and maybe he's actually taking the playing time from what would have been replacement level production. If the O's actually make the play-offs based on that half win, I'll be extremely surprised. More likely, Thome could be the difference between 81 and 81.5 wins, which some fans are more than happy to trade prospects for (which I think is dumb, but others have different priorities).

Simon is a 21 year old right-handed pitcher. He has a 3.96 ERA, 4.4 FIP in High-A ball, after being the team's 4th round draft pick last year. He'll get some groundballs and has a good walk rate (2.6 BB/9), but doesn't seem to miss many bats (6.1 K/9). Doesn't seem like a huge loss for the team, given that his upside might be back of the rotation innings-eater or middle reliever.

Lino is a 19 year old catcher. He's had some trouble in A-Ball this year - .218/.283/.342 - after a more impressive season in Rookie Ball (.282/.371/.462). Catchers who can stick behind the dish and potentially show a combination of patience and power at the plate are not that easy to find, and my understanding is that Lino has that potential (even if he's far from a sure thing).

Here's the thing; this trade is fine if the Orioles are actually as good as their record this year would indicate (42-35). But they're not - they've been outscored by something like 20 runs, and the bullpen is unlikely to continue to be this good. The pitching will hopefully be fine overall, but that's about all you can expect from them. And the offense has struggled, and even after adding Thome there are going to be at least a couple of holes in the line-up. And the defense will suffer - Thome at DH means that Wilson Betemit, Chris Davis, and Mark Reynolds all need to wear gloves to get their bats into the line-up, and that's gonna be ugly. The O's are in a decent position to finish at or above .500, but that could still leave them in last place in the AL East (and they're likely the least talented team in the division). They're not making the play-offs this year unless they get unbelievably lucky - and that's OK, because just not sucking wouldn't have been great before the season started.

The unexpected success early in 2012 is great, but that's more for what it means for the near future (contention might not be as far away as it looked a little while ago) than what it means for this season. To take the wrong lesson from that and sell out subsequent years in a misguided effort to try to make a run this year seems foolish. Buying at all didn't sound like the best idea, but going small-bore could have been fine (Thome for just Simon, as was initially reported, wasn't great but not terrible). Giving up even one of the lower-tier prospects from a shallow farm system for marginal improvement (at best) in an effort to be less bad (going forward) is... very much like the Orioles. In fact, it's been kind of Dan Duquette's M.O. so far (Dana Evaland, for example). Not one of my favorite things about him.

Hopefully Manny Machado for Matt Garza isn't coming down the pipe-line now. Because even though it would make the Thome trade make more sense, selling out to make a run this season would be insanity.