Brian Giles wasn’t supposed to be this good. A 17th-round selection by the Cleveland Indians all the way back in 1989, Giles was seen as a short, stocky kid without much “projection.” The El Cajon, California native was 5-10 on his tippy toes and had a frame that was already considered maxed out. In his early minor league career, Giles showed plate discipline beyond his years, but not a whole lot of power.

Upon reaching AAA, however, he turned into a hitting machine, getting on base at a .390+ clip and slugging 31 combined homers over the 1994 and 1995 seasons. Despite his keen batting eye (14.9 BB% in the minors), contact ability (13.8 K%) and burgeoning power, Giles never really got the opportunity to establish himself as a full-time player for the Indians. That was in no small part due to the absurd amount of outfield talent that flowed through Cleveland at the time (Manny Ramirez, Albert Belle, Kenny Lofton, David Justice). Giles posted a tasty .284/.391/.485 line in 857 AB for Cleveland between 1995 and 1998, but for that he was shown the door. Ten years ago today, Giles was shipped to Pittsburgh in exchange for LOOGY Ricardo Rincon in one of the most lopsided trades of the ’90’s.

Liberated in the ‘Burgh, Giles blossomed into an absolute force. Seeing his first full-time duty in 1999 at the age of 28, Giles posted a stunning .315/.418/.614 line, with 39 home runs. The good times would keep on rolling during his tenure with the Bucs. In fact, one could make an argument that Giles was one of the top 10 most valuable properties in the game during his time in Pittsburgh:

Giles’ WPA/LI, 1999-2003

1999: 6.31 (3rd in MLB)
2000: 6.05 (6th)
2001: 5.56 (12th)
2002: 6.81 (2nd)
2003: 2.95 (29th)

Upon being shipped to San Diego in July of 2003, Giles continued to compile impressive numbers, with a WPA/LI of 3.26 in 2004, 4.75 in 2005, and 1.71 in 2006. After a 0.56 WPA/LI mark in 2007, Giles bounced back to post a 2.52 figure in 2008. That 2008 performance ranked 15th among all outfielders.

While Giles’ power has been pared down by Petco Park’s cavernous dimensions, he retains perhaps the best strike-zone control of any player in the game today. The man with a career .404 OBP walked 13.5% of the time in 2008, and whiffed just 9.3%. Giles’ 17.4 Outside Swing Percentage (O-Swing%) was the 10th-lowest in the game, and by his standards, that was an ultra-aggressive season:

Giles’ O-Swing%, 2005-2008

2005: 8.5%
2006: 12.9%
2007: 14%
2008: 17.4%

When Giles does decide to fish at one out of the strike zone, there’s usually a good reason: he can make contact with the pitch. His 81.5 O-Contact% was the 6th-highest among all batters this past season. Interestingly, Giles has significantly increased his ability to put the bat on the ball on his outside swings as he has gotten older:

Giles’ Outside Contact Percentage (O-Contact%), 2005-2008:

2005: 63%
2006: 77.4%
2007: 73.8%
2008: 81.5%

When Giles decides to swing (which isn’t very often- his 39.9 Swing% was 13th-lowest in baseball), he almost never misses. His 92.8 Contact% was the best in baseball, and his contact percentage on pitches thrown in the strike zone (Z-Contact%) was second-best in the game at 96.2%.

Brian Giles will turn 38 in January, but he remains one of the most underappreciated talents in the game. He may no longer be the over-the-fence threat of his Pittsburgh days (part park effects, part father time), but Giles is coming off of a plenty useful .306/.398/.456 season, and the Bill James projection system forecasts a .280/.387/.435 line for 2009. If you want a player who knows the strike zone better than the man in blue behind him, then Brian Giles is your guy.

The prospect of a soon-to-be 300 game winner and future first-ballot hall of famer being undervalued sounds pretty silly. But free agent Randy Johnson may just fit the bill at this stage of his career. If reports are to be believed, Johnson is willing to cut his $16 million salary nearly in half to remain in Arizona, but the cash-strapped D-Backs do not appear interested. At $8-10 million for what would likely be a one-year deal, Johnson would be an absolute bargain in a pitching market that figures to see some exorbitant long-term signings. The Big Unit is also likely to be a big bargain on draft day.

Many were ready to write Johnson off following the 2007 season. After all, he had posted a 5.00 ERA with the Yankees in 2006, and then missed the better portion of the 2007 campaign following back surgery.

The problem with that thinking was, Johnson’s peripheral stats never took the big hit that his Bronx ERA suggested. Rather, he posted an incredibly low 61.8% Strand Rate (LOB%) in 2006, 13% below his career average. Johnson’s Fielding Independent ERA (FIP ERA) remained a steady 4.27, as he posted rates of 7.55 K/9 and 2.63 BB/9. He was a bit homer-prone (1.23 BB/9), but Johnson’s overall package of skills remained strong. In an injury-shortened 2007, Johnson would toss just 56.2 innings. However, he showed no signs of decline before the back injury sidelined him, compiling a 3.20 FIP ERA. He struck out 11.44 batters per nine innings and issued 2.06 BB/9.

In 2008, Johnson would recover and take the mound for 30 starts, turning in another fine season. In 184 IP, The Big Unit posted a 3.76 FIP ERA, with a solid 8.46 K/9 and just 2.15 BB/9. Home runs were still a slight issue (1.17 HR/9), but Johnson turned in a remarkably strong performance for any pitcher, much less for a guy in his mid-40’s. To illustrate how strong Johnson’s 2008 season was, here are his ranks among all starters in some major categories:

K/9: 11th
BB/9: 24th
K/BB: 10th
FIP ERA: 28th

In all probability, Johnson remains one of the top 30 starters in the game. He may no longer sling his fastball in the mid-to-upper 90’s (90.8 MPH in 2008), but he has compensated by adding a nasty split-finger pitch in addition to his trademark slider. As his heater has lost some hop, Johnson has gone from throwing his splitter 2.2% of the time in 2005 to 13.4% in 2008.

A look at Josh Kalk’s pitch F/X blog shows that while The Big Unit’s fastball may have lost some velocity, it remains a plus pitch. Johnson’s heat has a ton of horizontal movement (10.21 inches; the average fastball has 5.46 inches of horizontal break) and a decent amount of vertical break as well (7.76 inches). That newfound splitter is a good complementary pitch, as it dives about four inches lower in the zone than Johnson’s fastball. Combined with his slider, Johnson can still effectively work up/down and in/out, harnessing all quadrants of the strike zone. Opponents found him to be plenty hard to hit, as Johnson’s 78.2 Contact% was 18th-lowest among starting pitchers.

There are surely more inherent risks with a 45 year-old hurler who has undergone knee and back surgery over the past few seasons, but there are next to no signs of a degradation in performance here. Randy Johnson is without question one of the best starting pitchers of this generation. However, let’s not plan the date for his Cooperstown speech just yet: The Big Unit can still bring it.

In 2007, Brewers right fielder Corey Hart appeared to establish himself as a championship-caliber player. The lanky, 6-6 Hart had long been considered one of Milwaukee’s best young talents, and in ’07 he put together an impressive .295/.353/.539 line in 566 PA. His walk rate remained low (6.7%, the same as 2006), but he upped his Isolated Power (ISO) from .186 in 2006 to .244 in 2007, a whopping 58 point increase. His 2.38 WPA/LI ranked 12th among all outfielders, and with 24 HR and 23 SB, he turned in a nifty 20/20 season. Just 26 heading into the 2008 season, Hart figured to build upon his breakout year.

Suffice it to say, that didn’t happen. Hart turned in a disappointing .268/.300/.459 line, with his ISO falling back to .191. His already tenuous walk rate dipped to 4.2%. Hart still turned in a 20/20 campaign (20 HR, 23 SB), but his WPA/LI fell by over two wins, down to 0.28 (the 20th-worst mark among qualified outfielders).

In 2008, Hart found himself behind in the count after the first pitch more than any other player in the game. Hart’s First Pitch Strike Percentage (F-Strike%) was an alarming 68.9%, nearly three percent higher than second-ranked Adam Jones. This wasn’t a one-year fluke, either: Hart’s F-Strike% has been over 60% in every major league season, pointing to an unrefined approach that often leaves him behind in the count before he can even blink. While most players show some improvement in their plate discipline as they gain big-league experience, Hart has progressively become more of a hacker:

Hart’s Outside Swing Percentage (O-Swing%), 2006-2008:

2006: 22.3%
2007: 25.7%
2008: 31.7%

As he’s gotten older, Hart has devolved from a guy with a relatively patient approach to a free-swinging mess. His overall Swing % has also increased rapidly: 45.1% in 2006, 50.3% in 2007, and 54.7% in 2008. That 2008 number was the fifth-highest in the game. Swinging that often is okay if you’re shoe top hitter Vladimir Guerrero (who swung at a league high 60.3% of pitches seen) and you can make contact with 70% of pitches thrown outside of the strike zone, but Hart’s O-Contact% was a mild 54.5%, 14th-lowest among outfielders.

It appears as though pitchers identified a weakness in Hart’s game this past season. During his promising 2007 season, Hart saw a fastball 58.6% of the time. In 2008, he saw a heater just 51.7%, the 6th-lowest rate among all hitters. In place of those heaters, Hart saw a heaping helping of sliders, as his slider percentage increased from 18.7% in ’07 to 23.5% in 2008. Among qualified batters, only Hunter Pence, Dan Uggla and Geovany Soto saw a higher percentage of slide-pieces.

The game plan against Hart last season, particularly during his execrable second half (.239/.263/.396), became simple: get ahead of him 0-1, and then feed him a steady diet of sliders, knowing full well that he would be tempted to chase them out of the zone. The Bill James projection system sees a rebound season in store for Hart (.286/.336/.496), but he’s going to have to show some restraint against those outside sliders, lest NL pitchers make quick work of him again in 2009.

Batting average is a fickle statistic. Perhaps more than any other metric in the game, batting average is subject to the caprices of lucky (or unlucky) bounces here or there. A player with the skill level of a .300 hitter may find himself hitting 20 to 30 points above or below that number, and it wouldn’t really be considered all that unusual. A player may seem to be experiencing a “down” season, but it might be more the product of poor luck on balls in play than any massive downturn in talent level.

Which brings us to Robinson Cano. Over his four seasons in the major leagues, the Yankees second baseman has seen his performance vary by a considerable amount. Here are his WPA/LI numbers from 2005-2008, with his rank among second baseman in parentheses:

2005: -0.19 (14/15 among qualified 2B)
2006: 1.08 (4/23)
2007: 0.38 (13/26)
2008: -1.31 (17/18)

Cano’s performance has taken over a two-win swing since 2006, from a win above average to 1.3 below this past season. This would be suggestive of a change in skill level, but when we dig a little deeper into Cano’s numbers, not all that much has changed. Below are his batting lines over the past four seasons. Pay particularly close attention to the last number listed:

2005: .297/.320/.458, 3 BB%, 13 K%, .161 ISO, 20.6 LD%, .320 BABIP
2006: .342/.365/.525, 3.6 BB%, 11.2 K%, .183 ISO, 19.9 LD%, .363 BABIP
2007: .306/.353/.488, 5.9 BB%, 13.8 K%, .182 ISO, 16.9 LD%, .331 BABIP
2008: .271/.305/.410, 4.2 BB%, 10.9 K%, .139 ISO, 19.4 LD%, .286 BABIP

In terms of his controllable skills, there’s not a whole lot of difference between these four years, save for a bit of a dip in ISO this past season. Cano has established himself as a player who very rarely walks, makes a lot of contact and has a little more pop that the average middle infielder. What has fueled Cano’s varied performances is his batting average on balls in play (BABIP). Cano had a ton of bounces go his way during his .342 year in 2006, but very few auspicious hops this past season, when he batted just .271.

Given Cano’s 19.4 LD% in 2008, we would expect his BABIP to come in around .314 instead of his actual .286 mark (LD% + .120 gives us expected BABIP; .194 + .120= .314). Adjusting for that difference, Cano’s 2008 line “should” have been about .299/.333/.438. If we adjust for the BABIP variance in his other seasons as well, we can get a more approximate level of Cano’s talent:

2005: .320 BABIP, .326 Expected BABIP. Revised Line: .303/.326/.464, .790 OPS (.778 actual)
2006: .363 BABIP, .319 Expected BABIP. Revised Line: .298/.321/.481, .802 OPS (.890 actual)
2007: .331 BABIP, .289 Expected BABIP. Revised Line: .264/.311/.446, .757 OPS (.841 actual)
2008: .286 BABIP, .314 Expected BABIP. Revised Line: .299/.333/.438, .771 OPS (.715 actual)

Over this four-year period, the difference Between Cano’s highest and lowest actual OPS is 175 points. Once we adjust for the vagaries of balls put in play, however, the gap between his largest and smallest OPS is 45 points. In other words, Cano’s skill level hasn’t really varied all that much over this time frame: he’s about a .300/.325/.460-type hitter.

This exercise with Cano is an example of why batting average-dependent players are so risky. When a player derives a significant portion of his value from his average (which can vary drastically from year-to-year), it becomes extremely difficult to predict what sort of season that player will have. As we have seen with Cano, a .300-level hitter can show similar controllable skills yet have his batting average swing from .342 to .271. Unfortunately, it appears as though fantasy owners are going to have to continue to ride this roller coaster with Cano, as his plate discipline hasn’t shown much improvement through the years:

Outside Swing Percentage (O-Swing%), 2005-2008:

2005: 25.6%
2006: 30.8%
2007: 34.4%
2008: 30.7%

One of our new statistical toys, First Pitch Strike Percentage (F-Swing%), also serves to show Cano’s iffy plate approach. Cano had a first-pitch strike called against him 62.6% of the time in 2008, 11th-highest in the majors among qualified batters.

Such are the perils of drafting Robinson Cano. He’s plenty valuable if he’s hitting .300+, but he’s a cipher if he bats .270. If you’re going to invest in Cano, just realize that predicting his performance level is much trickier than it is for most other batters.

Indians lefty Scott Lewis is a tough guy to figure out. A look at his minor league track record would lead one to believe that he’s on the fast track to big-league success. If you watch him pitch, however, you’re likely to shrug your shoulders and say, “eh, he’s okay.” A 3rd round selection out of Ohio State in 2004, Lewis underwent Tommy John surgery in college and battled biceps tendinitis in the minors. But when he’s been on the mound, he’s posted some eye-popping statistics.

Lewis scarcely pitched in 2004 and 2005 as he battled injuries, but he tore up the High-A Carolina league in 2006. He posted a 2.14 Fielding Independent ERA (FIP ERA) in 115.2 IP, with 9.57 K/9 and 2.18 BB/9. That 4.39 K/BB was enough for Baseball America to rank Lewis as Cleveland’s 7th-best prospect. Noting that he was on a 60-75 pitch count limit following two lost seasons, BA rated Lewis’ curveball as “the best in the system with true 12-6 movement.” However, they also noted concern with Lewis’ fastball velocity, which dipped as low as 84 MPH and topped out in the high-80’s. Said BA, “It remains to be seen how Lewis’ below-average velocity will work against more advanced hitters.”

In 2007, Lewis would move up to the Eastern League (AA), where he would continue to post impressive peripherals. He struck out 8.09 batters per nine innings and issued 2.27 BB/9. He posted a 3.48 FIP ERA in 134.2 IP. The main difference between Lewis’ 2006 and 2007 seasons was his home run rate. While the flyball-oriented hurler surrendered just 0.23 HR/9 in ’06, that figure increased to a more reasonable 0.87 HR/9 in 2007. Following the season, BA would actually knock Lewis down to 16th in the Indians’ farm system. Citing his finesse style and a loss of confidence in his once-promising curveball, BA noted that Lewis was a “command/control deceptive left-hander.” A guy with an 86-90 MPH fastball and a decent changeup, BA pegged Lewis as a “4th or 5th starter.”

Lewis would return to the Eastern League to begin the 2008 season, tossing 73.1 frames for Akron while compiling a 2.30 FIP ERA. Lewis’ K rate declined somewhat (7.49 K/9), but he walked next to no one (1.10 BB/9) and benefitted from a very low 0.25 HR/9. Cleveland would promote Lewis to AAA Buffalo in the second half of the season, where posted similar peripherals (7.88 K/9, 1.5 BB/9) and a 3.03 FIP ERA in 24 innings. He would also toss 24 innings in his big league debut, making a decent first impression by posting a 4.80 FIP ERA. Lewis struck out 5.63 hitters per nine innings and walked 2.25 per nine. In his time with Cleveland, Lewis’ fastball came in at an average of 87.3 MPH. In addition to the fastball and 78 MPH changeup, Lewis utilized a 77 MPH slider and a 73 MPH curve.

So, what can we expect of Lewis in 2009 and beyond? His minor league track record is quite good, but we are also talking about a guy who throws 87 MPH on a good day, with flyball tendencies to boot. Will hitters continue to flail at Lewis’ changeup, or will they learn to lay off of it and make him use his mild heater? Will the home run bug bite him at the highest level of competition? Baseball Prospectus’ PECOTA system offered an eclectic mix of possible outcomes for Lewis’ career before last season. Among Lewis’ most comparable players were Ted Lilly and Randy Wolf on the positive side, and Casey Fossum on the opposite end of the spectrum. It’s probably best to take a wait-and-see approach with Lewis in 2009. Finesse, flyball lefties generally don’t fare well in the DH league.

The Atlanta Braves had grandiose visions of contention when the club acquired switch-hitting force Mark Teixeira from the Rangers in July of 2007. Atlanta surrendered a king’s ransom of prospects (Neftali Feliz, Elvis Andrus, Jarrod Saltalamacchia, Matt Harrison and Beau Jones), but the Braves were intent on making a playoff run and then attempting to sign the former Georgia Tech star to a long term-deal.

That pennant chase never materialized in either 2007 or 2008, and when it became apparent that Teixeira was intent on testing the free agent waters, the Braves were faced with the decision to either let Teixeira walk and collect compensatory draft picks or re-package him and hope for the best in another deadline deal. Atlanta decided to take the immediate help, shipping Teixeira to the Angels in exchange for relief prospect Stephen Marek and first baseman Casey Kotchman. Kotchman was once himself a top prospect, and will be under team control for a few more seasons. The question that will be asked today, however, is this: is a couple more seasons of Kotchman at first really a virtue?

A career .325/.407/.493 hitter in the minor leagues, Kotchman has long been noted for his sweet left-handed swing. The 13th overall pick in the 2001 draft had some questions regarding his power ceiling (.168 ISO), but his combination of contact ability (10.6 K%) and patience (12.3 BB%) was enough for Baseball America to rank him very high on its annual top prospect lists:

Kotchman’s BA Love (overall ranking on top 100 prospects list):

2002: 22nd
2003: 13th
2004: 15th
2005: 6th

The 6-3, 215 pounder would get a small amount of playing time for the Angels in 2004 and 2005:

2004: 128 PA, .224/.289/.276, 5.7 BB%, 9.5 K%, .052 ISO, 17.9 LD%, .248 BABIP
2005: 143 PA, .278/.352/.484, 10.6 BB%, 14.3 K%, .206 ISO, 21.3 LD%, .277 BABIP

Kotchman turned in a very mild season at hitter-friendly Salt Lake City in 2005 (.289/.372/.441), but his performance in the big leagues that year gave hope that he was finally starting to find his power stroke.

Instead of breaking out, however, Kotchman would find himself on the sidelines for almost the entirety of the 2006 season. After a very sluggish start (.152/.221/.215 in 88 PA), he was diagnosed with Mono and did not play in the majors again after May 8th.

Now 24 and running his organization’s patience a little thin, Kotchman was faced with competition from Dallas McPherson and Robb Quinlan for the starting first base job in 2007. Kotchman got the nod, and turned in what appeared to be a very promising campaign. He batted .296/.372/.467, showing the doubles-and-walks approach that made him so highly regarded. Kotchman’s .172 ISO was adequate for a first baseman, and he actually walked more than he struck out (10.7 BB%, 9.7 K%). Still, there were some caution signs that called into question the repeatability of his performance. Kotchman’s 16 LD% was pretty darned low, meaning that his BABIP should have been about .280 instead of his actual .308 mark. Adjusting for that difference, his line “should” have been .268/.344/.429. Also, his groundball rate was very high for a player at a power position (50.6 GB%).

Kotchman’s performance did indeed take a turn for the worse in 2008, as he hit a middle infielder-like .272/.328/.410 between the Angels and the Braves. His walk rate dipped considerably (6.4 BB%), though his K rate fell to a career-low 7.4%. Kotchman’s ISO was a paltry .137; only Daric Barton and Ryan Garko exhibited less sock from the first base position. Continuing a career-long trend, Kotchman hit groundballs at an alarming clip for a man playing a power-oriented position. His 52.7 groundball percentage was the 9th-highest among all qualified major league players.

For the sake of comparison, let’s take a look at the five guys ranked directly in front of and directly behind Kotchman in terms of GB%. In addition to their groundball rates, I included their baserunning scores from Bill James Online. The stat measures a player’s total adeptness on the basepaths: how well the player advances from 1st to 3rd, 2nd to home, and 1st to home compared to the league averages, as well as how much value the player brings in the stolen base department (only high-percentage base thieves receive credit).

Ryan Theriot 56.6 GB% (+10)
Delmon Young 55.2 GB% (-3)
Michael Bourn 53.9 GB% (+27)
Fred Lewis 53.9 GB% (+13)
Cristian Guzman 52.9 GB% (-4)
Casey Kotchman 52.7 GB% (-22)
Jacoby Ellsbury 51.7 GB% (+40)
Hunter Pence 51.7 GB% (-13)
Willy Taveras 51.5 GB% (+70)(!)
Russell Martin 51.1 GB% (+14)
Randy Winn 51.1 GB% (+41)

One of these things is not like the others. Okay, Young (whom we’ve covered before) and Pence don’t really belong either, but the overwhelming majority of the players who often chop the ball into the dirt have the speed and baserunning prowess to make it a viable strategy. Putting the ball on the ground isn’t a bad idea if you’re a burner, but when you’re a slow-footed first baseman who might not be able to beat the beer vendor down the base line, it’s probably not sound strategy to hit grounders at a rate commensurate to Jacoby Ellsbury.

Kotchman will turn 26 this offseason and still may have some development left, but it is looking increasingly unlikely that he will make good on the high hopes that prospect mavens had for him a few years back. He plays a slick first base (+13 in John Dewan’s Plus/Minus system), but an underpowered player at a premium offensive position just isn’t an asset. The average major league first baseman hit .271/.352/.463 this past season. Realistically, that’s about the best that one could hope for from Kotchman this upcoming season, and even that sort of line would entail significant improvement in his walk rate and a decrease in his number of groundballs hit. I think we may need to revise Ernest Thayer’s classic baseball poem:

The band is playing somewhere, and somewhere hearts are light,
And somewhere men are laughing, and somewhere children shout;
But there is no joy in Mudville— mighty Casey has grounded out.

Ever since the Kansas City Royals drafted him 14th overall in the 2004 amateur entry draft, Billy Butler has been known for his prodigious hitting skills. The 6-1, 240 pounder started off his professional career as a third baseman, but his lack of lateral agility forced a move across the diamond to first base. Even over there, Butler is a charter member of the Jason Giambi close-your-eyes-and-fall School of First Basemen. But it’s his bat that we want to focus on.

Butler has essentially made a mockery out of minor league pitching, compiling a stunning .336/.416/.561 career line in five seasons. While demonstrating ample power (.225) and patience (13.3 BB%), Butler has also managed to strike out just 17.4% of the time, an impressive number for a guy with plenty of juice in his bat.

The 22 year-old spent parts of the 2007 and 2008 seasons with the Royals, and has compiled a .282/.334/.420 line in 838 PA. He hasn’t been quite as patient in the majors to this point (7.2 BB%), but he has managed to whiff in just 12.3% of his at-bats and has made contact within the strike zone 91.7% of the time (the league average from 2005-2007 was about 88%). Butler’s .137 ISO strikes one as pretty tame considering his minor league pedigree, and combined with the very low K rate seems to point to a contact-oriented approach that is sacrificing something in the power department. To this point in his big league career, Butler has been chopping the ball into the dirt regularly:

2006: 46.7 GB%
2007: 48.8 GB%

That 2008 figure was the 10th highest groundball rate among AL batters with at least 450 PA. Putting the ball on the grass that often is an okay strategy if you have ample speed (like Carl Crawford, who ranks directly behind Butler at 48.6%), but it’s certainly not advisable for a plodding DH-type.

While Butler has already shown that he can demolish southpaws (.340/.398/.585), he’s had his fair share of issues with same-side pitching (.256/.304/.345 vs. righties). He also showed a pronounced split in the minors, but that was more the product of his cartoonishly good performance versus lefties (.403/.491/.781 in 278 AB) than any particular difficulties with right-handers (.307/.374/.493 in 992 AB). Expect his numbers versus righties to improve significantly moving forward.

While Butler’s power hasn’t quite translated to the major league level yet, it’s important to remember that he was an absolute hitting machine in the minors, with the strength to drive the ball over the fence and the pure hitting ability to spray line drives all over the field. The Bill James Handbook is a fan, as Butler’s 2009 projection comes in at .295/.357/.460. That’s pretty useful, and as a guy who will just turn 23 in April, Butler has a ton of development time ahead of him. If he sacrifices some of that contact ability in order to put more of a charge into the ball (and lower that groundball rate), Butler could emerge as an elite hitter as soon as this upcoming season.

The New York Mets are set at the front of the rotation with Johan Santana, Mike Pelfrey and John Maine. However, with Oliver Perez and Pedro Martinez both eligible for free agency, two other spots in the starting five may be up for grabs. Sure, the team from Queens could elect to fill one or both of those slots with splashy free agent or trade acquisitions, but the club could also take a long look at left-hander Jonathon Niese. A 7th-round selection in the 2005 amateur entry draft out of Defiance, Ohio (the same high school that produced Dodgers stud Chad Billingsley), Niese has steadily climbed the minor league ladder and reached New York for a brief cup of coffee last September. Though not overpowering, the 6-4, 215 pounder could prove to be a nice low-cost addition to the back end of the rotation.

Niese got his professional career off to a good start in a brief 24.2 inning stint with the GCL Mets (Rookie League) in the summer of 2005, striking out 24 batters and walking ten. The man the Mets pried away from a University of Cincinnati scholarship was ranked as the 9th-best prospect in the system by Baseball America following the season.

In 2006, Niese would be bumped up to the Low-A South Atlantic League, tossing 123.2 innings with Hagerstown. He posted a 3.52 Fielding Independent ERA (FIP ERA), striking out an impressive 9.61 batters per nine innings but also posting a hefty 4.51 BB/9. Still, the combination of K’s and groundballs (51.4 GB%) made for a solid debut for a teenager in a full-season league. Niese was bumped up to St. Lucie of the Florida State League (High-A) at the end of the year, tossing 10 frames with a 10/5 K/BB ratio. Following the season, BA would bump Niese up to the 7th-best prospect in the Mets system, noting the potential of his “big, looping 68-70 MPH curveball” but also mentioning that he can “get overcompetitive and try to strike everyone out.”

Niese would spend the entire 2007 campaign at St. Lucie, posting a 3.28 FIP in 134.1 IP. His strikeout rate dipped (7.37 K/9), but he sharpened his control by a considerable amount (2.08 BB), shedding almost two and a half walks per nine innings and compiling a 3.55 K/BB. Niese also continued to burn worms, generating groundballs at a 50.4% clip. Heading into 2008, BA listed Niese as the 8th-best farmhand for the Mets, noting that his curve had now become a “plus” offering and that he had “figured out how to throw his changeup with the same arm speed as his fastball.” However, his fastball velocity and stamina were still something of an issue: he sat “91-92 MPH early in games”, but that figure tailed off toward the middle innings.

In 2008, Niese would pass through the Eastern and International Leagues before getting a quick glimpse of the majors at the end of the season. In 124.1 IP for Binghamton (AA), Niese compiled a 3.03 FIP ERA. He whiffed 7.26 batters per nine innings while issuing 3.18 BB/9. His sinking fastball continued to keep his infield D busy, with a 52 GB%. Niese was promoted to AAA New Orleans in the second half, where he would post a 4.11 FIP ERA and a 32/14 K/BB ratio in 39.2 innings. In dire need of starting pitching down the stretch, the Mets promoted Niese to the big leagues, where he made three September starts. He posted an 11/8 K/BB ratio in 14 innings with a 7.07 ERA.

Jonathon Niese will likely never be a front-of-the-rotation stalwart, but his combination of solid K rates and groundball tendencies makes him an interesting young arm. There’s always concern with a pitcher like Niese who generates those K’s with a big breaking ball and a tame fastball (89.4 MPH with the Mets): conventional wisdom says that while minor leaguers may not be able to lay off of that 74 MPH curve in the dirt, major league hitters will show more restraint and be less apt to chase. With the high-80’s heat, the big-breaking curveball and so-so control, Niese seems to have a Barry Zito starter kit at his disposal, with better ability to induce groundballs.

Wait! Don’t run! Before Zito lost several ticks on his fastball and became one of the most infamous free agent signings in major league history, he was a useful (if overhyped) mid-rotation starter for the A’s. Niese could enjoy a similar career arch, minus the unwarranted hardware and nine-figure contract.

Regardless of what happens from this point forward, free agent Pedro Martinez will be known as one of the very best pitchers in the history of the game. A string-bean righty who was seen as too small to hold up under a starter’s workload while with the Dodgers in the early ’90’s, Martinez nonetheless established himself as a force, pitching very well for the Expos before reaching another level following a trade to the Red Sox. Pedro’s run from 1999-2003 will forever live in pitching folklore:

Pedro Martinez, 1999-2003:

1999: 213. IP, 1.39 FIP ERA, 13.2 K/9, 1.56 BB/9
2000: 217 IP, 2.16 FIP ERA, 11.78 K/9, 1.33 BB/9
2001: 116.2 IP, 1.60 FIP ERA, 12.58 K/9, 1.93 BB/9
2002: 199.1 IP, 2.24 FIP ERA, 10.79 K/9, 1.81 BB/9
2003: 186.2 IP, 2.21 FIP ERA, 9.93 K/9, 2.27 BB/9

However, that superhuman version of Martinez has long since left the building. The last time Pedro posted a FIP ERA under four was in 2005, his first season with the Mets. His 2007 season was spent rehabbing from a torn rotator cuff, and he missed a good portion of the ’08 campaign with a hamstring injury. In 109 innings, Martinez finished with a 5.18 FIP ERA, striking out 7.18 batters per nine innings and issuing an uncharacteristic 3.63 BB/9. A fly ball pitcher (41 GB%), Pedro was burned badly by the long ball (1.57 HR/9).

So, is there hope for a rebound? Martinez’s 5.18 FIP ERA might be overstating his decline somewhat. FIP ERA is a useful stat, but it does not “normalize” home run/fly ball rates. HR/FB rates for pitchers tend to stabilize at 11-12%, but Martinez posted a whopping 15.6 HR/FB rate. If we instead use Expected Fielding Independent ERA (XFIP), which uses a pitcher’s K and BB rates but also uses an average HR/FB rate (thus rooting out Pedro’s poor luck in that category), we find that he came in at 4.61.

Accounting for his poor luck on fly balls, Martinez was basically a league-average pitcher. But what is he throwing these days? To get a feel for Pedro’s stuff, let’s take a look at his pitch F/X data from Josh Kalk’s blog.

(X is horizontal movement. A negative X number means that the pitch is moving in toward a right-handed hitter, while a positive X means that the pitch is moving away from a righty hitter (in to a lefty). Z is vertical movement- the lower the Z number, the more the pitch “drops” in the strike zone.)

Fastball: -6.13 X, 7.25 Z
Sinker: -8.59 X, 3.83 Z
Curveball: 7.05 X, -5.57 Z
Slider: 0.93 X, 4.04 Z
Changeup: -9.1 X, 1.21 Z

Pedro’s fastball still retains a good deal of tailing action in on right-handed hitters, while his sinker has even more pronounced running and dropping action. While Fangraphs’ pitch data shows that Martinez’s 87.7 MPH fastball velocity was his highest since 2005, we’re still talking about a pitch with little margin for error. His slider/cutter too often caught the middle of the plate, but he still has two knock-out pitches in his low-70’s curveball and his mid-70’s changeup. Pedro’s curve is a sweepy offering, with a ton of horizontal break (7.05X) and a good deal of “dropping” action (-5.57 Z). The pitch essentially has the horizontal break of a slider and the vertical drop of a curve. His change, meanwhile, fades away from lefties (-9.1X) and “pulls the string” with a 6 inch difference in vertical movement between the fastball and the changeup.

A rebound for Pedro Martinez in 2009 entails two things: 1.) a decreased walk rate- finesse pitchers can’t walk over three and a half batters per nine- and 2.) an even more pronounced ability to pitch backwards, picking his spots with the fastball but relying heavily upon his big-breaking curve and fading changeup.

Call me crazy, but I’m not quite ready to stick a fork in Pedro yet. Yes, he’s 37 and injury-prone, but I get some Mike Mussina-type vibes from this situation. In 2007, Mussina endured a pretty rough campaign by his standards (4.58 XFIP) as he came to grips with his decreased velocity. But, with a deep repertoire of secondary offerings, he was able to rebound big-time in 2008. Of course, that’s the wildly optimistic scenario for Martinez- cases like Mussina’s are the exception to the rule, and Moose walked virtually no one (1.39 BB/9). But perhaps in the right ballpark, Martinez can become Moose-lite and turn in another above-average season.

Just like today’s other Trade Fallout subject, Carlos Gonzalez, Gregory Smith has also been involved in two high-profile trades over the past two off seasons. Popped in the 6th round out of LSU in the 2005 amateur entry draft, Smith was viewed as being a polished college lefty with relatively modest upside. At draft time, Baseball America noted that “While he has the repertoire, command and delivery to succeed as a pro starter, some scouts wonder if he might be more useful coming out of the bullpen.” As a starter, Smith’s fastball sat in the high-80’s, while he managed to touch the low-90’s out of the ‘pen.

In the summer of 2005, Smith got his professional career off to a decent start at Rookie-Level Missoula of the Pioneer League. Smith did exactly what one would expect an experienced SEC starter to do in rookie ball: in 82.1 IP, he whiffed 10.93 batters per nine innings while issuing just 1.97BB/9. Despite the excellent peripherals, he posted a 4.16 ERA. However, that was the result of a .316 BABIP.

In 2006, Smith would be tested by the unforgiving environs of Lancaster in the California League, a hitter’s paradise notorious for its wind gusts and box scores that might be mistaken for football games. Smith tamed the harsh conditions for the most part, posting a 3.22 Fielding Independent ERA (FIP ERA). He struck out 7.23 per nine innings while issuing 3.16 BB/9. He did benefit from an incredibly low .233 BABIP. BABIP tends to hover around .300 for starters in the majors, but in the low minors (with a lesser degree of defensive skill) it’s not that uncommon to see significantly higher rates. Miraculously, he also surrendered just 3 home runs in 88.1 IP, or 0.31 per nine innings. He did so in part by killing plenty of worms, generating ground balls at a 54.5% clip. Smith earned a mid-season promotion to AA Mobile of the Southern League. Facing a higher level of competition, Smith’s peripherals eroded somewhat. He posted a 4.15 FIP ERA in 60 IP, with 5.7 K/9 and 3.45 BB/9. His groundball tendencies seemed to disappear as well (35.2 GB%).

Smith would return to Mobile to begin the 2007 season, with much improved results. In 69.2 frames, he managed a 3.42 FIP ERA, whiffing 8.01 batters per nine innings while allowing 1.81 BB/9. Smith would remain fly ball-oriented, with a 43.5 GB%. He was bumped up to AAA Tucson of the Pacific Coast League at mid-season, where he posted a 3.93 FIP ERA in 52.1 IP. Smith’s K rate fell to a modest 5.85 per nine innings, and his walk rate was an average 3.1 per nine.

Following the trade to Oakland, Smith got the opportunity to step into the big league rotation, posting a 4.16 ERA in 190.1 IP. While that looks like a pretty good debut superficially, his peripherals point to a good deal of regression in 2009. His FIP ERA was 4.82, the result of a mediocre K rate (5.25/9) and ordinary control (4.11 BB/9). Smith also benefitted from a very low .258 BABIP, courtesy of good luck, a friendly home ballpark and slick glove work behind him (the A’s ranked fourth in the majors in Defensive Efficiency, which measures the percentage of balls put in play that are converted into outs).

Earlier this year, I took an in-depth look at Smith’s repertoire using the pitch F/X system. The bottom line: while Smith has a number of pitches at his disposal and he gets a good deal of movement on them, he’s performing a tightrope act with a very modest fastball. His heater averaged just 87.6 MPH in 2008. He also utilizes a mid-70’s curve, an 82 MPH slider and an 80 MPH changeup. It will be interesting to see how effective Smith’s curve and slider are at Coors’ high altitude; we’ve been hearing for years about how hard it is to throw a curve in Colorado, and studies indicate that the lower air density does impact the trajectory of the ball in a significant way.

Suffice it to say, Smith’s new home does not suit him well. He has established himself as a fly ball-oriented hurler (34.2 GB% in ’08), and is headed from a ballpark that features spacious foul territory and homer-suppressing tendencies….

McAfee Coliseum Run and HR Park Factors, 2006-2008

2006: Runs (0.921) HR(0.852)
2007: Runs (0.833) HR (0.786)
2008: Runs (0.916) HR (0.988)

….to a much less forgiving domain:

Coors Field Run and HR Park Factors, 2006-2008

2006: Runs (1.149) HR (1.167)
2007: Runs (1.160) HR (1.218)
2008: Runs (1.126) HR (1.299)

Smith benefitted from a below-average HR/FB rate in 2008 (7.9%), a number that figured to regress toward the 11-12% average anyway. With the move to Coors, his 0.99 HR/9 rate could balloon.

So, Greg Smith is a moderate-strikeout, moderate-walk, fly ball hurler headed to a ballpark known for giving pitchers nightmares. Add in the likelihood that his breaking balls will be less effective, and we’re talking about a pitcher with a high-80’s fastball/low 80’s changeup subject to the caprices of Coors. Hey, at least he’ll get to use that nifty pick-off move a lot. Avert your eyes, fantasy owners.