From the mailbag: Baxter, Hamels, Nieuwenhuis

The Mets-heavy edition. Here we go.

Scott writes:

What’s your opinion on how the Mets should utilize Mike Baxter at least for the immediate future?

It has been good to see Baxter get some starts over the past week, and he’s earned some more. Plus, though Baxter has seen very few opportunities against left-handed pitchers in 2012, he didn’t really demonstrate much of a platoon split in the Minors. So if Baxter is on the bench for a game, I might rather see him left in to face a lefty specialist in a pinch-hitting spot than see him pulled for one of the Mets’ lesser-hitting righty bench bats (i.e. anyone but Scott Hairston).

We talked about this some on the podcast that just rolled out: Jason Bay’s probably going to play every day when he returns, at least to start. There are a bunch of reasons for this, some better than others. His contract and veteran status don’t seem like good reasons to play him every day, but they do seem like likely factors. One last effort to get him straightened out so the Mets can part ways with that contract without eating the whole thing does seem like a decent reason.

But if and when Bay struggles against righties — as he did in 2011 and the first couple of weeks of 2012 — the Mets will have to face platooning Bay if they want to win as many games as possible. They’ve got three lefty-hitting outfielders (with varying amounts of upside) who are under team control way longer than Bay and who could feasibly play some role on future Mets contenders. Baxter, older and less-heralded than Kirk Nieuwenhuis and Lucas Duda, is probably the lowest priority for regular at-bats. But he has also performed the best in his tiny sample in 2012.

Unless Baxter is somehow one of the top five hitters in the Majors he’s not going to keep hitting at this clip, obviously. But 27-year-olds with histories of good Minor League hitting do sometimes come out of the woodwork to become productive Major League regulars, so it doesn’t seem imprudent to give Baxter as many opportunities as possible to prove himself. It’ll just be tough to do that, given how many lefties the Mets have in their lineup and how many seem to also merit regular at-bats. The task becomes easier if the Mets do decide to demote Ike Davis.

Paul writes:

Hey Matt,

Big fan of the blog. I was wondering do you think the mets should trade David Wright? and what sort of prospecs could they get in a deal for wright? chipper jonas is retiring, would the Braves be willing to give3 up some of their arms in a package for Wright?

Hey Paul: You misspelled “traid.”

Speaking of which, C. Hamels writes:

If you could traid Val Pascucci straight up for me, would you pull the trigger?

Well, yeah. C’mon now. I hope it’s clear by now that I realize Cole Hamels is about as awesome at pitching as he is at posing for embarrassing photos. Plus, as much as I dislike the Phillies, I’m rooting for Pascucci to get more Major League chances anywhere, and the Phillies could use a bat right about now. Ty Wigginton, of the .639 OPS and the not-very-good defense, is the righty half of their first-base platoon. You’re telling me Pascucci can’t outproduce that?

The Mets could use a starting pitcher, the Phillies could use a power bat and Pascucci could use another crack at big-league pitching. It just makes sense. GET IT DONE SANDY.

Steve asks:

Kirk Nieuwenhuis (spelled it without looking it up, how’d I do?) has been striking out in 30% of his at bats. You think he’ll still turn out to be a solid regular?

Nieuwenhuis’ 30.3 percent strikeout rate is nothing extraordinary by his standards; he struck out in 27.4 percent of his plate appearances in Triple-A. He will likely have to improve that if he aims to become a solid regular.

The outstanding baseball-reference play index for whatever reason doesn’t seem to search by strikeout percentage, but to date there have been only 17 full seasons in Major League history in which a hitter suffered an at-bat to strikeout rate as low as Nieuwenhuis’ current 2.9 with an OPS+ above 100 (i.e. league average). Most of them are by three-true-outcomes type mashers: Three by Jack Cust, two by Jim Thome, two by Mark Reynolds, two by Rob Deer, two by Adam Dunn, etc.

Of course, there’s probably some selection bias in play. Ten of those 17 seasons have come since 2006, so maybe, as the Major Leagues warm to the idea that strikeouts aren’t so awful, we’ll see more guys succeed despite extremely high strikeout totals. And maybe, somehow, Nieuwenhuis is one of those guys.

But since Nieuwenhuis is currently the benefactor of the Majors’ second-highest batting average on balls in play, it seems like he’ll have to put more balls in play to keep his batting average and on-base percentage up when that normalizes a bit. But he’s 24 and these are only his first 144 Major League at-bats, so there’s hope yet.

Over-unders revisited

At long last, I have added the rest of the preseason over-unders to the sidebar on the right side of this blog for reference. Five of them have been settled already.

Kirk Nieuwenhuis made his Major League debut on April 7. 63 percent of readers believed he would appear in a big-league game before July 13.

Dillon Gee shaved his goatee last week. 66 percent of readers predicted he would shave it before July 1.

On May 18 in Toronto, Scott Hairston hit an opposite-field home run — his first since 2009. Only 41 percent of readers thought Hairston would serve up the proverbial oppo taco this season.

Finally, when Mike Pelfrey fell victim to a torn ligament that ended his season prematurely, he locked in a line full of weird, small-samply rates. He allowed 11.0 hits per nine innings this season after only 35 percent of readers thought he’d allow more than 10 hits per nine, and, more alarmingly, he finished with a 3.25 K:BB ratio, which absolutely no one predicted.

With Leather

Completist readers of this site know that: A) I’m generally down on prospects, or at least banking on prospects from the low Minors to someday contribute to Major League teams and B) I still sort of randomly pick favorite prospects and track their progress even if I know how unlikely it is they’ll ever be as good as I hope. One such prospect is lefty Jack Leathersich, who earned my attention based on his awesome name and even more awesome strikeout rates. Toby Hyde has an interview with the young man, who was recently promoted to High-A St. Lucie.

Leathersich’s first 36 2/3 professional innings have gone about as well as any pitcher could ever hope, for what it’s worth. He has struck out 63 batters in that span while walking only 11, yielding 16 hits and no home runs. He has a 0.74 ERA. Yeah, he’s probably ready for High-A ball.

Card stock

Baseball fans argue endlessly about the best ever to play the game, tossing around names like peanuts at a ballpark. But no one disputes that the greatest card collector was Jefferson R. Burdick….

The father of card collectors, as Burdick was known among his admirers, amassed more than 30,000 baseball cards that are presumed to be worth millions of dollars.

But they will never reach the marketplace because Burdick gave his trove to the Metropolitan Museum of Art, the storehouse of civilization known for its Egyptian mummies, medieval armor and Renoirs. It also houses one of the largest baseball card collections in a public institution.

Ken Belson, N.Y. Times.

Awesome read from the Times about Jefferson Burdick, a lifelong baseball-card collector (and oddly, not a big baseball fan) whose collection is housed but not fully on display at the Metropolitan Museum of Art. The article says that “the museum is trying to fulfill his wish that the cards be available to everyone,” which would be sweet. I happen to enjoy the Met plenty without a huge old-timey baseball-card exhibit, but I imagine I’d go there a lot more if there was one.

In the earliest days of my baseball fandom, I collected cards voraciously. I don’t know why exactly it petered out in the early-to-mid-90s — probably some combination of things. I remember growing slowly frustrated with the splattering of card brands, when it was no longer just Topps, Donruss and Fleer but suddenly Upper Deck and Score and Bowman and O-Pee-Chee Premier, and the valuable cards weren’t just the rookies of the good players but the Platinum Special Collection Rookies of the good players and other such nonsense. Also, I suspect my burgeoning interest in girls probably got in the way of considered baseball-card investments.

I still have every single card, though. They’re not worth nearly as much as I thought they’d be by now, in part because my brother and I scaled them and flipped them and traded them with our neighbors all the time, and never paid much attention to keeping them in good shape. Plus I’d never sell them anyway, because selling the baseball-card collection that I shared with my late brother for something less than the fortune we thought we’d someday reap from our binder pages upon binder pages of Pete Incaviglia rookies would be about the saddest thing imaginable.

Sometimes when I’m home, I look through them. The binders are a fun reminder of the dudes we hoped would one day be good and how infrequently prospects actually pan out, not to mention an entertaining peek at several of the late-90s’ beefiest sluggers in their much slimmer days.

But now I’m more taken by our huge duffel bag full of scrubs, all the heroically mustached and tragically sideburned lunchpail guys we tossed aside while weaning out the Wally Joyners and Kevin Seitzers. Some of the names and faces I recognize from later stints with the Mets or one of their divisional opponents, or from certain odd moments in the national spotlight forever inked in my memory; some are guys I’ve seen coaching or scouting, even spoken to in this line of work.

Most of them are just guys, though — smiling portraits or dirty uniforms with a baseball-reference page and a permanent home stuck face-to-face with Kelly Gruber in a duffel bag in my parents’ basement. And somewhere, certainly, those guys and their wives and their kids have those same cards framed and those baseball-reference pages bookmarked, and a lifetime of triumphant and tragic baseball memories to go with them.

And I don’t think that’s sad, really. I think that’s pretty awesome. I mean, Spike Owen doesn’t have any photos of me in his parents’ basement.

Twitter Q&A

A massive oversight, that’s how! I meant to mention when Thayer re-emerged in the Majors last month, then got distracted. Now he’s closing games for the Padres and has yet to allow a run. Dale Thayer! Mustache hero Dale Thayer!

He’s also on my fantasy team. Look at this glorious man:

Here’s what someone who’s better than me at Photoshop needs to do: Take the most over-the-top gory-looking Slayer poster or t-shirt image you can find, add an awesome mustache to one of the skulls, then change the text from “SLAYER” to “THAYER.” I’d totally buy that t-shirt.

I’ve always been partial to the Quebec Nordiques’ jerseys, but if I were in the market for a hockey jersey I’m not sure I’d be able to resist the urge to buy one with “SATAN” on the back, for comic value. And in that case, it’d have to be Islanders.

Alternately, I might just also wear a No. 57 Minnesota Wild jersey with “SANTANA” on the back like Johan Santana did, because Johan Santana would probably be my favorite hockey player.

Man. Oh man.

I think about stuff like this with some frequency, trying to assign monetary values to creature comforts. For example: I can’t wear jeans to work. This is a business environment, and up the chain someone decided everyone in my office needs to wear pants everyday except on very special occasions (i.e. the day after Christmas). I hate wearing pants and feel way more comfortable in jeans. I’ve thought about it, and determined that I’d probably give up about six to seven percent of my salary per year to be able to wear jeans to work. And I really need money, living in the city with my wife in school and all.

But giving up bacon? Man… man. It’d be a lot. It’d have to be at least enough to buy a house, and even then I’m not sure. What’s the point in owning a house if I have to live in it knowing I can’t ever wake up to the smell of delicious bacon?

Here’s the question: Is this a no-backsies situation? Because I’d be way more inclined to do it if I could just pay the other guy back at a later date and start eating bacon again — though I guess in that case it’s more like a loan in which the interest is just that I can’t eat bacon.

But I’m pretty confident in my awesomeness, and any price I name feels like undercutting my earning potential. What if I say $2 million right now? That seems like a reasonable price to get me to give up bacon forever. But what if you pay me $2 million to give up bacon for the rest of my life, and by some coincidence, shortly thereafter suckers finally recognize. And now all of a sudden I’ve got book deals and record contracts and a TV show and $2 million I made on my own, and I can’t spend any of it on bacon. Total monkey’s-paw scenario.

So I’m not settling for any less than $5 million. For $5 million, I’ll give up bacon for the rest of my life. Possibly.

Yeah, it’s probably time to see what McHugh can do in Triple-A, huh? Toby says he’s waiting for an injury or an opening in the Triple-A rotation, and it always seems like there’s a lot more that goes into these decisions than I ever consider. But Garrett Olson hasn’t been spectacular in the Triple-A rotation and might have some value to the big-league club as a lefty in the bullpen. Maybe McHugh gets promoted to the Triple-A rotation and Olson transitions to a relief role?

 

Sandy Alderson on Jenrry Mejia’s future

Well right now, Jenrry will be going to Binghamton for a couple of starts; he’ll probably go to Buffalo for a couple of stars. We’re still in a sense in a rehab phase with Jenrry. He’s only a year out from surgery. I did talk to the doctors as recently as a couple of days ago. He’s a very quick healer and he’s done very well. But as the same time, we need to continue to allow him to pitch on four-five days rest so he has a routine, work on all his pitches so that he has better mastery of them, and then when we get to the end of that, say, two-to-four-start cycle, then we’ll decide what he’ll do in terms of role and where he’ll do it. You know, we have other guys that are coming along — Beato should be ready by the time his disablement ends — and others that are also performing pretty well at the Minor League level that aren’t on the roster. Right now we want to preserve that roster space and see how our guys at the Minor League level develop over the next three or four weeks.

– Sandy Alderson.

There has been a lot of speculation and some anticipatory hand-wringing over what the Mets will do with Jenrry Mejia once his rehab from Tommy John surgery is done and he’s ready to re-join the big-league club. Alderson doesn’t sound overwhelmingly sure he’ll make Mejia a big-league reliever just yet, plus the situation is a bit different than it was a couple years ago for a variety of reasons.

Which is to say: I’ll wring my hands when it feels appropriate. This front office seems pretty committed to handling its prospects with the requisite care and it’s not on the thin ice the last one was when it made Mejia a Major League mop-up man at 20. Plus, though the Mets should try to get the best from all their prospects, they do have more than just one well-regarded pitching prospect in the high Minors now. So it’s not — to re-use a metaphor I used at the time — putting all your eggs in one basket then vigorously shaking that basket.

Today in burying the lead

So this rather limber walk-off steal of home in a high-school game is pretty awesome, and made Deadspin and Last Angry Fan:

But you know what neither of those blogs spent much time on? This walk-off steal of home came on behalf of Lick-Wilmerding High School. There’s a Lick-Wilmerding High School! Every weekday morning from September to June, legions of giggling teenagers and tortured teachers show up at Lick-Wilmerding. Dan the Automator is a Lick-Wilmerding alumnus.

Man enough to bunt

Among average to poor hitters, the breakeven point is that much lower.  Whereas the breakeven point for a great hitter is 45% to 50% success rate on bunts, for an average hitter, it’s all the way down to close to 40%, and for a bad hitter, it’s around 35%.  And, we’d expect average hitters to be able to bunt better than great hitters (because of experience), and similarly, the bad hitters may be the best bunters (because they need to learn whatever to survive as hitters).

So, to shift against an average or worse hitter is about the worst defensive alignment you can imagine, and the average or worse batter needs to bunt any chance he gets, when the bases are empty.

Tom Tango, The Book Blog.

Tango makes the case that the smartest counter to aggressive infield shifting is to bunt against it every time. It’s an interesting read, though I wonder if the expected success rate for bunting for base hits, even against shifts, is as high as he suggests. At the very least, more frequent bunting against shifts would likely make defenses more hesitant to use them, allowing the hitters in question to go back to swinging away.

This

And when I say things like “that doesn’t mean it’s the right call”—thinking that it’s unlikely to have much if any benefit is not the same thing as being certain it has no benefit. It takes nothing away from the serious study of baseball—and in fact adds quite a bit to it, in my estimation—if we can be humble enough to admit that we aren’t certain when we shouldn’t be certain. In this case, there is still some unresolved doubt, and the Angels probably ought to have the benefit of it.

Colin Wyers, Baseball Prospectus.

This is why Wyers is among my favorites of the numbers-heavy baseball writers going on the Internet these days. The borderline-to-downright arrogant air of authority that comes with much of the contemporary sabermetric analysis bothers me, because if anyone knew everything there is to know about baseball there’d really be no reason to keep studying it. Maybe it weakens conclusions to admit you might be wrong about something — and it doesn’t seem like there’s much accountability anyway — but I prefer honesty and humility to confidence where it should not exist.