Photo

Articles in Response to Jimenez Signing / MASN Press Conference


  • Please log in to reply
134 replies to this topic

#1 BSLChrisStoner

BSLChrisStoner

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 108,047 posts

Posted 18 February 2014 - 09:32 AM

MLB.com: What does the Jimenez signing mean for the Orioles?
http://brittghiroli....or-the-orioles/

 

CBS Sports: O's gamble on Jimenez unlikely to pay off
http://www.cbssports...kely-to-pay-off

 

ESPN: Jimenez makes sense for Orioles
http://insider.espn....aw/post?id=1851

 

The Hardball Times: Jimenez's enigmatic season
http://www.hardballt...igmatic-season/



#2 BSLSeanJester

BSLSeanJester

    Restaurant / Travel Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,658 posts

Posted 18 February 2014 - 09:41 AM

So, essentially, what we're looking at with Jimenez is a pitcher who was lights out for 14 starts in 2010 and great for 12 starts to finish the 2013 season. Put those together and it's not even one full season. And otherwise, in the past four years, Jimenez has been anywhere from relatively average to downright dreadful.

 

There is valid concern here.

 

If Jiminez stinks for a majority of his contract, it will only scare off Pete and the Orioles from handing out contracts similar to, or bigger than, this.

 

Hopefully he finds stability in the 4-year deal.


I never had friends later on like the ones I had when I was twelve. Jesus, does anyone?


#3 BSLSeanJester

BSLSeanJester

    Restaurant / Travel Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,658 posts

Posted 18 February 2014 - 09:49 AM

And the positives from that CBS article:

 

Now, we could try to spin this in a positive direction. Let's do so for a second.

Jimenez was a very good groundball pitcher from 2008-11. Last season, he started to get back a bit to those groundball tendencies -- and now he'll have Manny Machado and J.J. Hardy playing stellar infield defense behind him.

Last season, Jimenez posted the highest strikeout rate (9.56 K/9) of his career, too.


I never had friends later on like the ones I had when I was twelve. Jesus, does anyone?


#4 Mackus

Mackus

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 40,243 posts

Posted 18 February 2014 - 09:59 AM

The CBS article is pretty well cherry picked.  It mentions his high ERAs over 2011 & 2012, but doesn't mention that his ERA was much higher than his FIP/xFIP in 2011.  He could've been much better that year but it seems like he didn't catch any breaks.  2012 he was inarguably terrible by all measures.

 

And last year, he gave up 7 runs in both his 2nd and 3rd starts of the year, spanning only 6 innings total.  After April 16th, he had a 2.74 ERA.  Even taking out the 12 final starts where he was dynamite, he still had a 3.61 ERA from April 16th through July 22nd, when that hot streak began.
 

I think last year was a consistently very good  to great year for him aside from those 2 early starts in his first 3 outings.  It wasn't just a hot finish over the last 12 starts.


  • BSLMichaelWeber and Miller192 like this

#5 Russ

Russ

    HOF

  • Moderators
  • 8,718 posts
  • LocationThe BQ

Posted 18 February 2014 - 10:01 AM

So, essentially, what we're looking at with Jimenez is a pitcher who was lights out for 14 starts in 2010 and great for 12 starts to finish the 2013 season. Put those together and it's not even one full season. And otherwise, in the past four years, Jimenez has been anywhere from relatively average to downright dreadful.

.It is a valid concern, but that's why we can get Jimenez for 4/$50 instead of 5/$100. He's a good risk at a good price, a little more than a drop in the bucket to teams outside of Tampa.

#6 BSLChrisStoner

BSLChrisStoner

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 108,047 posts

Posted 18 February 2014 - 10:05 AM

FanGraphs: The Orioles bet on the new Jimenez
http://www.fangraphs...ubaldo-jimenez/



#7 Pedro Cerrano

Pedro Cerrano

    SportsGuy's Muse

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 28,560 posts
  • LocationEllicott City, MD

Posted 18 February 2014 - 10:06 AM

Advanced stats guys, building off Mackus' post, any chance we can chalk up when he's been bad to poor luck?


There is baseball, and occasionally there are other things of note

"Now OPS sucks.  Got it."

"Making his own olive brine is peak Mackus."

"I'm too hungover to watch a loss." - McNulty

@bopper33


#8 Matt_P

Matt_P

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,552 posts

Posted 18 February 2014 - 10:09 AM

FanGraphs: The Orioles bet on the new Jimenez
http://www.fangraphs...ubaldo-jimenez/

 

Off topic, I've been getting a lot of virus warnings when I've tried to go to fangraphs since yesterday on multiple computers and browsers. One said that there was a trojan embedded in some of the ads. Have you had the same problem?



#9 Mackus

Mackus

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 40,243 posts

Posted 18 February 2014 - 10:12 AM

Advanced stats guys, building off Mackus' post, any chance we can chalk up when he's been bad to poor luck?

 

2011 you can.  Or could make a strong case.

 

His FIP and xFIP (fielding independent pitching, xFIP calculated slightly differently in regards to HR-rate) were both a full run lower than his actual ERA

 

He's been pretty consistent in terms of peripherals (K-rate, BB-rate, HR-rate) which is what the fielding independent stats are based on.  He's been between 3.30 and 3.80 in both stats every year from 2008 through 2013 except for his horrid 2012 (which was inescapably bad by all measures) and a 3.10 FIP in 2010 and 4.16 xFIP in 2008.  And aside from 2011, his actual ERA has typically been pretty close to his fielding independent ERA.


  • Pedro Cerrano likes this

#10 Stotle

Stotle

    2080 Baseball

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 529 posts

Posted 18 February 2014 - 10:15 AM

Advanced stats guys, building off Mackus' post, any chance we can chalk up when he's been bad to poor luck?

 

If it didn't coincide with sloppy mechanics and erratic stuff, sure!  In all seriousness, he has a lot going on in his delivery, and historically it has been difficult for him to consistently execute. It's loud stuff, so he gets away with some scattershot, but when he has been bad it hasn't been situations you can chalk up to poor luck. Unless you are talking about the unfortunate circumstance of having high maintenance mechanics.


  • Pedro Cerrano, JeffLong and Matt_P like this
@NickJFaleris

#11 Ricker Says

Ricker Says

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 42,987 posts
  • LocationGermantown, MD

Posted 18 February 2014 - 10:19 AM

Advanced stats guys, building off Mackus' post, any chance we can chalk up when he's been bad to poor luck?

 
If it didn't coincide with sloppy mechanics and erratic stuff, sure!  In all seriousness, he has a lot going on in his delivery, and historically it has been difficult for him to consistently execute. It's loud stuff, so he gets away with some scattershot, but when he has been bad it hasn't been situations you can chalk up to poor luck. Unless you are talking about the unfortunate circumstance of having high maintenance mechanics.


Do you know enough about Dave Wallace to make you feel good or bad about the O's ability to help Jimenez?
@0TheRick0 (AKA The Rick)
"You can't sit on a lead and run a few plays into the line and just kill the clock. You've got to throw the ball over the damn plate and give the other man his chance. That's why baseball is the greatest game of them all." ~ The Earl of Baltimore

#12 Mackus

Mackus

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 40,243 posts

Posted 18 February 2014 - 10:21 AM

If it didn't coincide with sloppy mechanics and erratic stuff, sure!  In all seriousness, he has a lot going on in his delivery, and historically it has been difficult for him to consistently execute. It's loud stuff, so he gets away with some scattershot, but when he has been bad it hasn't been situations you can chalk up to poor luck. Unless you are talking about the unfortunate circumstance of having high maintenance mechanics.

 

I don't really agree with that.  At least not fully.  2012 I certainly do, he was awful and I'm sure a wreck mechanically.

 

But what's different about his 2010 and 2011 seasons, aside from ERA?

 

K-rate: 8.69 in 2010, 8.60 in 2011

BB-rate: 3.74 in 2010, 3.73 in 2011

HR-Rate: 0.81 in 2010, 1.27 in 2011

GB%: 48.8% in 2010, 47.2% in 2011

FB%: 35.0% in 2010, 33.3% in 2011.

 

If the mechanics were shaky, wouldn't you see an increase in walks?  Decrease in strikeouts?  Change in FB or GB rates?  He did drop in velocity, so that's an argument to mechanics, but it didn't seem to effect his K-rate, BB-rate, or GB/FB ratio.

 

Where the numbers really indicate that he got lucky/unlucky between the two seasons:

 

LOB-rate (percentage of runners stranded): 76.5% in 2010, 65% in 2011

BABIP: .271 in 2010, .314 in 2011

HR/FB (percentages of flyballs that left the park): 5.1% in 2010, 9.3% in 2011

 

He stranded fewer runners in 2011, gave up more hits more often on balls in play, and more of the flyballs he gave up left the park.  Everything else was pretty much the same.  Unless there was a weird split that doesn't show up in the full season stats, like he was very good early and very bad late or something, the numbers don't scream out that there was any mechanical issue.  Or perhaps more accurately, a mechanical issue that was the main cause of his higher ERA that season, instead of just some bad breaks or unfortunate results that were beyond his control.


  • Dr. FLK likes this

#13 BSLChrisStoner

BSLChrisStoner

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 108,047 posts

Posted 18 February 2014 - 10:22 AM

Off topic, I've been getting a lot of virus warnings when I've tried to go to fangraphs since yesterday on multiple computers and browsers. One said that there was a trojan embedded in some of the ads. Have you had the same problem?


No, I haven't had that.



#14 BSLChrisStoner

BSLChrisStoner

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 108,047 posts

Posted 18 February 2014 - 10:26 AM

Sports Illustrated: After quiet off-season, Orioles take gamble on Jimenez

http://mlb.si.com/20...ioles-contract/



#15 Stotle

Stotle

    2080 Baseball

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 529 posts

Posted 18 February 2014 - 10:52 AM

Do you know enough about Dave Wallace to make you feel good or bad about the O's ability to help Jimenez?

 

No, I do not.  


@NickJFaleris

#16 bnickle

bnickle

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 38,177 posts

Posted 18 February 2014 - 10:59 AM

I've heard last year described as a tale of 2 halfs for him. Obviously, he was outstanding from the AS break through September.

 

However, I heard a stat on ESPN that said after April he only gave up more than 3ER 3 times the rest of the year. The point, I guess was that he was putting things together long before July and had 4 or 5 good months and not just 2 and a half.

 

 

Edit: So just looked it up. His ERA in May was 4.23 and in June it was 3.09.

 

He was horrible in April with a 7.13 ERA. Interestingly though, his April WHIP of 1.33 was the 2nd lowest of any of his months. Only trailing his outstanding September of 1.01



#17 Stotle

Stotle

    2080 Baseball

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 529 posts

Posted 18 February 2014 - 11:00 AM

I don't really agree with that.  At least not fully.  2012 I certainly do, he was awful and I'm sure a wreck mechanically.

 

But what's different about his 2010 and 2011 seasons, aside from ERA?

 

K-rate: 8.69 in 2010, 8.60 in 2011

BB-rate: 3.74 in 2010, 3.73 in 2011

HR-Rate: 0.81 in 2010, 1.27 in 2011

GB%: 48.8% in 2010, 47.2% in 2011

FB%: 35.0% in 2010, 33.3% in 2011.

 

If the mechanics were shaky, wouldn't you see an increase in walks?  Decrease in strikeouts?  Change in FB or GB rates?  He did drop in velocity, so that's an argument to mechanics, but it didn't seem to effect his K-rate, BB-rate, or GB/FB ratio.

 

Where the numbers really indicate that he got lucky/unlucky between the two seasons:

 

LOB-rate (percentage of runners stranded): 76.5% in 2010, 65% in 2011

BABIP: .271 in 2010, .314 in 2011

HR/FB (percentages of flyballs that left the park): 5.1% in 2010, 9.3% in 2011

 

He stranded fewer runners in 2011, gave up more hits more often on balls in play, and more of the flyballs he gave up left the park.  Everything else was pretty much the same.  Unless there was a weird split that doesn't show up in the full season stats, like he was very good early and very bad late or something, the numbers don't scream out that there was any mechanical issue.  Or perhaps more accurately, a mechanical issue that was the main cause of his higher ERA that season, instead of just some bad breaks or unfortunate results that were beyond his control.

 

He's a high on base arm, so of course if he allows more hits, he is likely to allow more runners to score. I think the "luck" related numbers your citing are at least a partial manifestation of flatter stuff thrown less precisely in the zone. That belief is shared by teams who were not interested in his services, in spite of the upside, due to disbelief in his ability to execute consistently enough for the loud stuff to play.

 

I would also say it is not a coincidence that CLE acquired both Jiminez and Trevor Bauer -- similar issues which to org deemed correctable, given the investment required. I think it is somewhat telling that Cleveland did not want to give Jiminez marginal money (4/50 is marginal today, right?) even with his successes last year. Likewise, the Indians have not yet found success with making Bauer's execution more uniform, so he hasn't been called upon to help the big club -- not even out of the pen in a pennant chase.

 

Anyway, I'm sure some luck is involved. But flat stuff and leaving balls up and over have a way of bumping BABIP and HR rate, too. 


@NickJFaleris

#18 FlavaDave10

FlavaDave10

    Dave

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,870 posts
  • LocationBalmer

Posted 18 February 2014 - 11:03 AM

Love this deal for this price. Props to Dan Duquette. Considering the crazy contracts that some pitchers have gotten this off-season, Jimenez for 4 years/$50M is a good value. Seem to remember somebody reporting last night that some of the contract will be deferred money, even better value if that's true. 


I don't suffer from insanity. I enjoy every second of it.

 

 

@BmoreDaveS


#19 Ricker Says

Ricker Says

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 42,987 posts
  • LocationGermantown, MD

Posted 18 February 2014 - 11:09 AM

He's a high on base arm, so of course if he allows more hits, he is likely to allow more runners to score. I think the "luck" related numbers your citing are at least a partial manifestation of flatter stuff thrown less precisely in the zone. That belief is shared by teams who were not interested in his services, in spite of the upside, due to disbelief in his ability to execute consistently enough for the loud stuff to play.

 

I would also say it is not a coincidence that CLE acquired both Jiminez and Trevor Bauer -- similar issues which to org deemed correctable, given the investment required. I think it is somewhat telling that Cleveland did not want to give Jiminez marginal money (4/50 is marginal today, right?) even with his successes last year. Likewise, the Indians have not yet found success with making Bauer's execution more uniform, so he hasn't been called upon to help the big club -- not even out of the pen in a pennant chase.

 

Anyway, I'm sure some luck is involved. But flat stuff and leaving balls up and over have a way of bumping BABIP and HR rate, too. 

With the season UJ ended up having last year, I don't think you can really say that. My guess is they didn't want to spend the money, and valued an extra 1st round draft pick.


@0TheRick0 (AKA The Rick)
"You can't sit on a lead and run a few plays into the line and just kill the clock. You've got to throw the ball over the damn plate and give the other man his chance. That's why baseball is the greatest game of them all." ~ The Earl of Baltimore

#20 Stotle

Stotle

    2080 Baseball

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 529 posts

Posted 18 February 2014 - 12:00 PM

With the season UJ ended up having last year, I don't think you can really say that. My guess is they didn't want to spend the money, and valued an extra 1st round draft pick.

 

That doesn't pass the smell test. If Cleveland thought last year's performance was truly indicative of future performance, you don't think they'd lock up those services for 4/50? This is a playoff contending team that benefited from some of the best performances of Jimmy's career, worked with him day in and day out, and didn't want anything to do with 4/50. It isn't because they don't want to part with a potential 2016/2017 contributor they might obtain with a supplemental-first round pick.


@NickJFaleris




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Partners