Washington Nationals: 2011 Final Team Report Card.
by Doghouse on Oct 31, 2011 3:00 PM EDT
Email
PrintAfter giving everyone a few weeks off from the end of the regular season, it's time to unleash the notoriously unforgiving Doghouse Curve (it breaks right over your GPA). We all enjoyed the Nationals' great late-season run, as they knocked around the Phillies and Braves, beat up the Marlins, and came within a Doug Slaten relief appearance of posting their first winning record since coming to DC. With the season over, it's time to take an objective look back at 2011 and see how the Nats measured up as a team.
Overall: C-
The team finished 80-81, one game under .500. They were third in the NL East, 21.5 games out of first, 8.5 games behind the second-place Braves, and 8.5 games ahead of the last-place Marlins. They placed 8th overall in the NL, 9.5 games behind the wild-card-winning Cardinals. They were 0.2 runs/game worse than the average team when you account for the strength of their schedule (which was 0.1/runs game easier than average this season, interestingly enough). I tried to find a way to give the Nats a straight "C" on the season, but even with the third-place finish, they're under .500 and closer to the bottom of the division than the top. That's a "C-." That's held surprisingly steady over the course of the season, and it's also a full letter grade better than 2010 (D-), which was better than 2009 (F). The Nats have gone from failures to just below league average.
After the jump, grades for offense, starters, relievers, defense, and luck. Stats from the redoubtable fangraphs and baseball-reference. Put your own grades (or take vigorous exception to mine) in the comments!
Offense: D
As team, the 2011 Nats had an 89 wRC+ (12th in the NL). Their collective 242/309/383 hitting line was tied for 2nd-worst AVG, tied for 4th-worst OBP, and 6th-worst in SLG. They were 7th in HRs (154), edging the 8th-place Phillies by one. In terms of patience, they're tied for worst in the league in strikeout rate (whiffing 21.7% of the time), while generating the fourth-worst rate of walks (7.7%). On the bases, they're 8th in SB (106), 9th in SB% (74%), but 3rd best in baserunning apart from SB (+8.5 runs above average). Overall, the Nats scored 3.88 runs/game in 2011, 11th in the NL and well below the league average of 4.13 runs/game. The Nats lagged the league in most categories, and barely kept pace in the rest. Their offense wasn't as failtastic as the Padres, Pirates, or Giants, so they barely cling to their first-half "D." That's better than the "F" they started the first quarter with, and it matches their "D" from last season, but it's worse than 2009's "C."
Starting pitching: C
In 2011, Nats' starters averaged 5.8 IP/GS, tied for 2nd-worst in the NL. They had the 4th-lowest percentage of quality starts (48%). They had an overall ERA of 3.80 (7th) for an exactly league average 100 ERA-. Their FIP and xFIP were both worse than league average (9th and 14th, respectively). The rotation gave up a fourth-best 0.83 HR/9, while racking up a 2nd-worst 14.8% strikeout rate (5.67 K/9), but a fourth-best walk rate of 6.7% (2.58 BB/9). Starter WHIP was right around league average at 1.32 (8th). Despite these shaky stats, they only gave up 2.74 runs/game, 6th in the NL (2.87 is league average). There's some good stuff (low walks and HRs), but some real bad (low IP, low Ks), and overall decent performance (better than average runs/game). I'll call that a "C," which continues the improvement from 2010 (C-) and 2009 (D-) but stays level with the rest of this season.
Relief pitching: C
In the 2011, Nationals' relievers were 4th in ERA (3.20), 7th in FIP (3.66) and 8th in xFIP (3.91). They were 8th in strikeout rate (21.2%) and 9th in walk rate (9.6%), but 4th best in WHIP (1.26). They were 7th in home run rate (0.76 HR/9). They allowed 32% of inherited runners to score, fourth-worst in the league (30% was league average). And although I don't believe in the save stat, the Nats blew 28 in 2011--the most in the NL (although there were only 11th in blown save percentage, since they were also tied for the most save opportunities at 77). The Nats also had the most games lost by the bullpen when the starter was in line to win, as well as the second fewest games won by the bullpen when the starter was in line for a loss. We're seeing some good, some bad, and a lot of average. Call that a "C," a slight improvement over 2010 (C-), and a big improvement since 2009 (F).
Defense: B
The advanced defense metrics are reliably uncertain about how much they like the 2011 Nats. By UZR, they're 11th in the NL (-14.3 runs). However, they're 2nd best in Defensive Runs Saved (+38) and best in the NL in Total Zone Runs (+39). The Nats are 8th in defensive efficiency rating (.697) and 10th in FP (.983). Team CS% is down to 34%, only 3rd in the league, although they also have the 3rd fewest SB against. This is a slight down-tick from the first half of the season (B+); Zimmy's struggles to master his new throwing mechanics didn't help, nor did losing Pudge's arm. However, it's still a solid improvement over 2010 (C) and 2009 (F).
Luck: Slightly lucky.
"Luck" doesn't count in your grade, but it's something to keep track of--it hints at whether the team will be able to repeat its grade next year. Team BAbip (roughly, "hitting luck") was .292 in 2011, barely less than the league average .296, so hitting luck is about even. Likewise, the pitchers stranded 73.6% of runners--9th in the NL and just around league average. However, staff ERA outperformed both FIP and xFIP, showing the benefits of decent defense and keeping down the HRs. BAbip against was .293, right around league average. Finally, the Nats scored 624 runs in 2011 and allowed 643, for an "expected" W/L of 78-83, making their actual record two games luckier than average. That's a wash in hitting luck, slight pitching luck, and some defiance of Pythagoras for slight luck overall.
What does this tell us?
Not to be a downer, but this tells us that the 2011 Nationals were not a good baseball team. They weren't a bad team, but they were only notably above average in one category--defense. That was balanced out by being notably below average in offense. Despite the help that's coming and the good pieces that were in place, the pitching staff was league-average at best over the course of the season. Only piece of the SPAD formula that worked in 2011 was the D, and the lack of "O" in "SPAD" was painfully apparent.
But is there hope?
Oh, my, yes. I mentioned the grades from previous years because I had forgotten just how terrible the Nats were when I started writing these report cards. The Nats have climbed up from "F" to "C-" in two seasons, and I think we can reasonably expect improvement in every category in 2012--even with no trades at all. However, I suspect that Rizzo just may have a trick or two up his sleeve between now and Spring (MOAR OFFENZ PLZ!). I haven't done the math yet, but I'm figuring to project 82+ wins for 2012.
31 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Maybe below average but so so much better than recent memory
particularly relief pitching. as far as the starters, at least we could usually assume about 5 innings of decentness which is something we couldn’t say just a short while ago
Yeah, well, you know, that's just like, uh, your opinion man
but, who do we BLAME!!!, for frank's sake?!?
( I’m for adding 10% across the board for teh evaluatin’ & experimentin’, maybe 15% due to the rigglin’ on top of that… )
"...because I spent years as the only Expos fan I knew..." -P.R., Oct. 2011...+1
by cat daddy3000 on Oct 31, 2011 3:58 PM EDT up reply actions
He"s a witch!!!!
"...because I spent years as the only Expos fan I knew..." -P.R., Oct. 2011...+1
by cat daddy3000 on Oct 31, 2011 5:13 PM EDT up reply actions
I'm blaming Rizzo because he forgot that SPAD is Loserville...but
SPAD+O Rawks!
Much MOAR O this year, Rizzo…please.
Oh, and no more Slaten…too broken to perform reliably. Time for the glue factory.
AND, yes, yes, yes to Yu Darvish!
(Heh…I’m NOT giving up until he’s signed somewhere else.)
"player development" should not be gladiator games. by cat daddy3000 on Aug 6, 2011
was about to say Harper makes the team out of ST, then he whiffs on three straight....
I suspect Rizzo gets the Rays’ CF and the countdown to jettison La Roche begins…
"...because I spent years as the only Expos fan I knew..." -P.R., Oct. 2011...+1
by cat daddy3000 on Oct 31, 2011 5:28 PM EDT up reply actions
Perfect example.........
of lieing stats. I would give the Bull Pen a B amybe B+ and would’nt augue withanyone who wanted to give an A.
Team grade? Whats an A? A world series title or missing the playoffs by one game?
I expected pretty much what we got. Just not how we got it……….Never saw that pathetic offense coming.
I’ll tell you right now I exect 90 wins in 2012 and 6 months fighting with all the posters who beleive in sitting your number 1 during a playoff run……….
I would easily give half of the bullpen a "B" or better...
…however, the other half is easily a “D” or worse. Drags down the class average. Last time I did a pitcher report card, the bullpen was A, A-, B-, C+, C-, F—and that was just for relievers who were active at the time and had a decent amount of innings. The pitchers I didn’t grade didn’t have a lot of innings or weren’t on the roster anymore because they had pitched badly (or were hurt… or both).
On my scale, a team gets an “A” for making the playoffs and being substantially better than league average (so, much to RobBob’s annoynace, you can win 95 games and get a “B” because your division is tough and you missed the WC by half a game, and you can make the playoffs and get a “B” because your division is weak and you clinch it with 85 wins).
"If you ain't got the pants, you ain't got a chance." --PerryMason (on the sartorial component of being a Real Ballplayer)
I find that I'm closer to RobBob on the issue of appropriate scale
I think that it’s more important to judge across MLB (or, for your diehards, the NL); and as we all know the Nationals finished in the “first division” in 2011 (15th in a 30 team league). Being right on the boundary would seem to be an automatic C grade, especially since their pythagorean isn’t really that out of line (I’d argue that a two game variation is inherently statistical noise).
Further, they achieved this result against a schedule that was actually slightly tougher than league average. If you look at the MLB Baseball Relative Power Index, the Nationals had the 11th hardest strength of schedule in 2011. That’s actually likely to get even harder in 2012, by the way, as the Nationals square off against the AL East. For most teams they at least get to play the Orioles as well as the rest of the division, but since the Orioles are already the Nationals’ “rivalry” opponent there is no offset to the fun of getting to play the Yankees, Red Sox, Rays and Blue Jays.
Bottom line for me: 15th of 30 teams against a slightly harder than average strength of schedule = a solid C. Not yet good, but no longer putrid.
Forgot to include a tip o' the hat
To Byron Kerr at MASN for the timely work on strength of schedule.
Baseball-reference...
…disagrees. They have the Nats at 20 in strength of schedule and 19th in Simple Rating Sytem. It is important to judge across MLB/NL, but I think it’s just as important to also judge how close the team gets to the playoffs—that’s our ultimate goal.
"If you ain't got the pants, you ain't got a chance." --PerryMason (on the sartorial component of being a Real Ballplayer)
No no no ... that's the goal in *2012*
Remember what Davey said today! It’s a new goal, one they weren’t ready for before.
When I see different sites cross analyze the same data and come up with wildly different conclusions, I am often put in mind of Mark Twain:
Figures often beguile me, particularly when I have the arranging of them myself; in which case the remark attributed to Disraeli would often apply with justice and force: ’There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.
For many reasons (finishing 15th out of 30, etc) I do think that a C is the appropriate grade for the Nationals as a whole. I also think that citing a one game difference between the playoff spot (when the playoff spot was a team out of the division), but the last place team that is in the division is a fairly incoherent distinction. Especially when the Nationals finished 24.5 games ahead of the last place team in the league (and a mere 21.5 games behind the first place team). And that even accepting your criteria, having the difference of a single game (9.5 games behind the Cardinals, 8.5 ahead of the Marlins) mean that a “C” is not justified and the team falls to a “C-” … well, it has to be acknowledged that such a distinction means that the grading field for the “C” is an incredibly narrow band!
But it’s your grading, Sir, and I salute you for the effort :-) We have do have something to chew on until pitchers and catchers report. Sigh.
I'd go along with that...
The end-of-season bullpen probably read something like this –
Clippard =A, Storen =A-, Stammen = A-, Gorzelanny =B, Mattheus =B-, Coffey =C+, HRod= C, Burnett =D, Severino = D, Balester = D, Maya =D-, Slaten =F.
I might move Maya(bullpen only) and Sevrino to a D+, and Burnett to a C-
but other than that I agree
MOAR SEVERINO!
One thing to consider with the bullpen
Pitchers active at the end of the season who threw at least one game from the bullpen, allowed just over 24% of inherited runners to score (76 of 240). Peacock was 2/2 (100%) in his only appearance, and Slaten was horrid at 50% (15/30), with Burnett close on his heels at 45% (18/40), then Balester at 44% (4/9).
Bullpen B?
You can’t focus too much on Clippard and Storen. The back end has to get an A or at least near to. But the rest of the bullpen was a solid D, with some Fs. It averages out around a C. But I expect H-Rod and Burnett to have much better seasons next year, Storen to have a slightly better season, and Clippard to regress slightly. With those guys eating up the majority of relief appearances we’ll average out better regardless of who fills the remaining spots.
My only issues with the SP grades...
would be that the team grade was dragged down by:
1) The overall lack of deep (6+IP) outings; JZimm (6.21), Livo (6.05), and Marquis (6.03) were the only SP’s to average over 6IP per start over the season.
2) Gorzelanny in a starting role. 14HRA in 82.7IP, only 6 QS in 15GP; Ouch.
Using 11 SP’s over the course of the season was probably about average, but I haven’t chacked the numbers. I understand the C grade, but the Manager over the 1st half was driven by pitch counts & a crappy offense that cut some outings short, imo.
So you're saying the bullpen wasn't an F-?
"I was a victim of a series of accidents. As are we all."
---Malachi Constant
by The Herndon Kid on Oct 31, 2011 8:53 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
An impressive analysis
I think the thing to remember here is that the grades are on performance, not how the results compared to expectations. The team was definitely better than last year in all phases except offense; however, everywhere except Lake Woebegon, an average result is a ’C".
The starters were better than last year. The back of the bullpen was excellent (except for Storen’s occasional meltdown). The middle/long relief and situational relief pitching was, at best, spotty.
Spending the week on vacation within sight of the home of the poster children for what happens when you focus entirely on SPAD (I’m talking to you, Seattle), I agree that Rizzo needs to back off a bit and sacrifice a bit of defense for offense. Morse in LF, much as it pains me, is one step in that direction. Now that Davey has completely unexpectedly been named manager for 2012, it will be interesting to see whether he returns to his Mets days of placing offense before defense (Howard Johnson at SS, Kevin Mitchell at any position other than fry cook at McDonalds, etc.).
And I firmly believe that, come 160 IP, Strasburg becomes a spectator for the rest of 2012. If you want to have your star pitcher pitch 200+ innings the first full season back from TJ surgery, I suggest you drop the Nats and go follow Dusty Baker. (I hear Mark Prior had a great time in the Yankee farm system. And how did Kerry Wood end 2011? Anyone? Bueller?)
Brain: "Pinky, are you pondering what i'm pondering?"
Pinky: "Yes, ... wait, ... no, ... never mind"
Whoever the new pitcher is going to be, it's not going to be CC Sabathia
Who did not opt out, but Joel Sherman is reporting that Sabathia has accepted an extension from the Yankees instead of opting out.
This was the most depressing story I have read in a long time!
I’m giving the team an overall A. When a team wins 80 games, finishes third in their division, when the predictions are 69 and last, I’ll give them the credit where it is due. All this other stuff….hogwash. At least to me.
"Integrity First, Service Before Self, Excellence In All We Do" - USAF Core Values
I think the story is hopeful
The team wasn’t good in 2011. However, it also wasn’t terrible like it was in 2008-2009, or merely bad like 2010. The team has gotten better, and I think it’s going to keep getting better. The Nats are on the way up, and the numbers reflect that.
"If you ain't got the pants, you ain't got a chance." --PerryMason (on the sartorial component of being a Real Ballplayer)
And the numbers reflect
An overall grade of C! C’mon Doghouse, just one small step for a man, one giant leap for a team. C!
Goona say what folks won't want to hear....
I think the grading is pretty much on target. I’ll focus on the offense and what I’m going to say is gonna draw a lot of fire. The problem with the offense is straight up the middle. The reason its gonna draw fire is because its our much vaunted “youngsters” that are killing the offense. These guys gotta pick it up!
First forget September baseball. Much of that is AAAA stuff. Lets look right up the middle prior to that.
Ramos… Hitting in the low .200’s prior to September. Grounding into double plays ala Cal Ripken. Killing rallies was routine. Great defensive catcher but he’s gotta quit that penchent for hitting into DP’s.
Espinosa…hitting in the .220’s …no power what so ever after the all-star break…dropped out of ROY contention…Did the league figure him out?
Desmond…Spent the whole season prior to September in the doldrums hitting in the .220’s and .230’s …Won’t cut it. Looked better later but geez…
Center field…There wasn’t one….And those that were put there couldn’t hit for squat. Bernadina showed little. Ankiel has a great arm. Werth …well he showed good defence but another low .200’s hitter.
The team can’t afford 4 regulars hitting under .250 and be a contender. Unfortunately for the Nats, in baseball, you can’t score on defence.
The catcher and infield guys are young and I’m willing to give them the chance to mature some. But if the offense up the middle doesn’t improve the Nats can’t contend.
I'm not that far off on the grading
Most of the unit grades I’m OK with. My grand argument with Doghouse really amounts to quibbling: I say it’s a C, he says C-.
I think a team can afford regulars hitting under .250 IF those regulars are also drawing walks. Many Nats hitters seem allergic to walks, and hopefully that will change as they mature.
I'm with you all the way
They were as “.500” as they could get, given the missed game. I don’t really need to look at all the other stats Doghouse cites (although I don’t mean to criticize the effort!) – wins are what it’s about and .500 is as “average” as there is. Lose the minus sign, I say.
If you don't eat your meat, you can't have any pudding! How can you have any pudding if you don't eat your meat?!
80 wins is as close to average as a true .500 team can get
And a true .500 team is a clear C average team in my book. If they had finished with a 81-80 record, would they have earned a C+?
By the way, I am willing to believe that they would have had a very good chance to beat LA if they had played that rainout game, so it’s fair to give them at least a half of another win. So they really finished the season 80.6 – 81.4.
Rob
-- In baseball we trust.
Is there hope...?
Wow Doghouse, one more win in 2012? Thanks for firing up our hope. Who knows, maybe we could even drop that minus next year!!!
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Federal Baseball
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
GAMETHREAD SPONSOR
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Keeping good company: Albert Pujols becomes fourth-youngest player to hit 450 home runs
- Giancarlo Stanton misses cutoff man, and Logan Morrison is thankful he did (Video)
- Snoop Dogg delivers memorable first pitch at U.S. Cellular Field
- The Juice: Mesoraco’s grand slam helps Reds complete four-game sweep of Braves
- Please hold: Indians’ Joe Smith jumps the gun on relief appearance
