Finally the DBacks Team Health Report

[DWKB]

Baseball Prospectus has finally released the Team Health Report for us. I'm going to post it without comment.


http://premium.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=1691

 

[Dback Jon]

This really doesn't tell us anything we don't know, other than rating Randy and Curt as "Yellow" since they are "so old" and so important to the team.

 

[RLakin]

Calling Craig Counsell anything more than an Eckstein-esque overachiever is somewhat laughable, so Bob Melvin's quote that Counsell was the D-Backs' MVP is two full steps beyond the ridiculous. According to Lee Sinins, Counsell was nearly the worst regular on the team last season, saved only by the presence of Tony Womack. Counsell at least has the excuse that he was playing injured to fall back on--he had off-season surgery to fuse his cervical spine.

Way off base. The D-backs fell apart after this "Eckstein-esque overachiever" was lost for the season. "Eckstein-esque" is also funny terminology since Counsell was playing the "Eckstein role" for the D-backs one year before Eckstein was doing it for the Angels.

 

[mark1]

That guy is brutal. He is a typical bozo who doesn't know squat about the Diamondbacks.

 

[DWKB]

Originally posted by mark1
That guy is brutal. He is a typical bozo who doesn't know squat about the Diamondbacks.

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/c...arroll&subject=2003-03-10+Team+Health+Reports

Here is a way for you to e-mail him with your feelings about his article. I'd be curious as to the response you get from him if you chose to e-mail him and tell him what your disagreements are.

 

[schillingfan]

Article is a typical example of why so many people find baseballprospectus so annoying. Their writer's middle names must all be arrogance.

I saw their Phillies report and their yellow lighted every single pitcher. Whatever.

So what's your opinion DWKB? Or are you just planning to hit and run here without having to stick your neck out?

 

[Smolder]

hahahaahahahah! yeah! sounds suspiciously like kingbud's trying to play instigator here.

 

[Moose Lady]

Originally posted by mark1
That guy is brutal. He is a typical bozo who doesn't know squat about the Diamondbacks.

Brutal maybe but all they are going by is the rule of averages. They're just assuming that anyone over 35 is due to fall apart so they start making their predictions from that age on and eventually they will be right.

 

[Derek in Tucson]

I actually like Will Carroll's articles most of the time, but it seems to me this one is just a re-tread from any one of a 100 articles that has been critical of the DBacks chances in the last 2 years. While in the past there wasn't any pitching depth at AAA Tucson when it came to replaceable parts for the rotation, this year is different. I wouldn't classify the Sidewinders rotation as elite, but there is depth there with any one of them perfectly capable of stepping in if Patterson does indeed falter. But I can understand all the yellow lightsbecause of the injury history of the DBacks'players.

 

[DWKB]

Originally posted by schillingfan
So what's your opinion DWKB? Or are you just planning to hit and run here without having to stick your neck out?

I didn't intend to "hit and run" nor did I intend to instigate anything. I was just posting it for DBack discussion (that is what this board is about isn't it? )

I sorta agree with Derek in that I think Will knows his injury risks and it is very wise to heed his concerns whether you agree with his organizational outlook or not.

I think that some are over-reacting about his analysis. A yellow light means just that, caution. It doesn't mean "this guy's gonna break down".

I think we should be cautious about Patterson (just coming off of sugery), Curt ( fatigued down the streth last year for whatever reason) and Kim as a starter (throwing many more innings than before)

Bautista and Dellucci are injuries waiting to happen (or already have happened) and Gonzo is coming off of one also.

Counsell hasn't shown that he's ready to come back and contribute every day yet.

I think anyone is fooling themselves if they aren't sitting on pins a needles about Mantei (and not already considering who will be our closer replacement if...)

Finley and Randy do have histories of back problems although they both seem to handle it better than most. Doesn't mean it's not something to consider (even though Carroll says about both that the chance of it happening this year are slim)

 

[RLakin]

Originally posted by DWKB
I didn't intend to "hit and run" nor did I intend to instigate anything. I was just posting it for DBack discussion (that is what this board is about isn't it? )

I think we should be cautious about Patterson (just coming off of sugery), Curt ( fatigued down the streth last year for whatever reason) and Kim as a starter (throwing many more innings than before)

Bautista and Dellucci are injuries waiting to happen (or already have happened) and Gonzo is coming off of one also.

Counsell hasn't shown that he's ready to come back and contribute every day yet.

I think anyone is fooling themselves if they aren't sitting on pins a needles about Mantei (and not already considering who will be our closer replacement if...)

Agree on several of these points, especially the first paragraph.

Counsell, though, I would give some time. Hell, most gave Williams 3 years, so I'll at least give Counsell 3 weeks. I noticed, though, the Republic has already listed Counsell (and Overbay) as struggling this spring. It's probably true, but contrast that w/ the papers treatment of Williams over those 3 years. Funny how some people are off limits and some aren't, injury issues or not.

Mantei's tenure as closer is tedious at best, and I think Valverde is someone the team may be looking at very soon if something happens.

 

[schillingfan]

I didn't really take exception to the yellow lighting, rather it was the sneering tone. I mean all of his negative crap aside, the D-Backs have won a world series and taken the division 3 out of the last 4 years. So go sneer about the Brewers or the Marlins. I mean comments like this one:

Calling Craig Counsell anything more than an Eckstein-esque overachiever is somewhat laughable, so Bob Melvin's quote that Counsell was the D-Backs' MVP is two full steps beyond the ridiculous.

See, I figure that baseballprospectus hates the D-Backs because they have done everything they say is bad to do (overpaying aging veterans) and they win. They are the anti-A's. so they have to drop little digs whenever they can because they consistently make them look foolish.

JMO

 

[Smolder]

See, I figure that baseballprospectus hates the D-Backs because they have done everything they say is bad to do (overpaying aging veterans) and they win. They are the anti-A's. so they have to drop little digs whenever they can because they consistently make them look foolish.

what's with d-back bashing anyway? it's like, even with the blatant yankees bias in the media, the diamondbacks get the complete opposite: anti-dback mania. i mean, how many sportswriters have you seen actually praise the diamondbacks (as in, the positives outweigh the negatives). im getting really sick of people waiting for the dbacks to keel over and die.

 

[AZZenny]

Calling Craig Counsell anything more than an Eckstein-esque overachiever is somewhat laughable, so Bob Melvin's quote that Counsell was the D-Backs' MVP is two full steps beyond the ridiculous. According to Lee Sinins, Counsell was nearly the worst regular on the team last season, saved only by the presence of Tony Womack.

I am curious why the statheads here are being quiet on this - it's been my impression the numbers indicated CC was having a darn good season in 2002, until shortly before he went out (I can still see that flying, crashing dive towards second when his head visibly snapped up, and he wasn't 'right' after that). And to give Womack credit for what CC has accomplished seems statistically unsupportable.

To me the main benefit of stats should be that they are neutral, that they (ideally) represent data, not opinion. So if BBProspectus is really a neutral, facts and numbers-driven source, could you guys explain how they justify this comment? I also agree with RLakin - Eckstein is a young Counsell, not the original.

 

[DWKB]

Originally posted by AZZenny
Calling Craig Counsell anything more than an Eckstein-esque overachiever is somewhat laughable, so Bob Melvin's quote that Counsell was the D-Backs' MVP is two full steps beyond the ridiculous. According to Lee Sinins, Counsell was nearly the worst regular on the team last season, saved only by the presence of Tony Womack.

I am curious why the statheads here are being quiet on this - it's been my impression the numbers indicated CC was having a darn good season in 2002, until shortly before he went out (I can still see that flying, crashing dive towards second when his head visibly snapped up, and he wasn't 'right' after that). And to give Womack credit for what CC has accomplished seems statistically unsupportable.

To me the main benefit of stats should be that they are neutral, that they (ideally) represent data, not opinion. So if BBProspectus is really a neutral, facts and numbers-driven source, could you guys explain how they justify this comment? I also agree with RLakin - Eckstein is a young Counsell, not the original.

Baseball Prospectus has never claimed to be neutral in their analysis, but they do claim to maintain providing the objective measures they derived their opinions from for others to draw their own conclusions. I think there is a big difference there.

The comment is backlash with the fact that we have two incredible SPs who pitched last year and helped the DBacks on their way to the division more than 9 CCs could have would be my guess.

It's not that BP thinks CC isn't useful (you can read what they say about him in the player evaluation section)

But the numbers showed that CC didn't have an OPS over .700, with only Womack being lower as a regular starter. The bright side of this, of course, is that CC was almost equal in OBP as he was in SLG and as long as the guy isn't making outs, I can put up with his .350 SLG.

But the numbers show that CC wasn't close to the teams MVP last year. Not unless he willed Gonzo to hit and Randy and Curt to pitch like they did somehow.

 

[DWKB]

Originally posted by schillingfan
I didn't really take exception to the yellow lighting, rather it was the sneering tone. I mean all of his negative crap aside, the D-Backs have won a world series and taken the division 3 out of the last 4 years. So go sneer about the Brewers or the Marlins. I mean comments like this one:

I don't figure you read the sight on a daily basis (I don't now that they've become pay) but the do sneer at MIL and FLA (and KCR, and DET, and BAL, and CHC, etc..)

Originally posted by schillingfan
See, I figure that baseballprospectus hates the D-Backs because they have done everything they say is bad to do (overpaying aging veterans) and they win. They are the anti-A's. so they have to drop little digs whenever they can because they consistently make them look foolish.

JMO

Well then they wouldn't hate ANA because the Angels did't field a player over 34. But then ANA didn't hit HRs or take BBs so BP must hate them too. Wait....now I'm confused.

 

[schillingfan]

Originally posted by DWKB
Well then they wouldn't hate ANA because the Angels did't field a player over 34. But then ANA didn't hit HRs or take BBs so BP must hate them too. Wait....now I'm confused.

I got the impression they hated Anaheim, too, or at least they hate the myth that is Anaheim, the team of guys who play small ball, do the little things like move runners, etc. This is all counter to what BP believes. Besides, the comment I quoted about Counsell was a slap at Eckstein, too.

 

[DWKB]

Originally posted by schillingfan
I got the impression they hated Anaheim, too, or at least they hate the myth that is Anaheim, the team of guys who play small ball, do the little things like move runners, etc. This is all counter to what BP believes. Besides, the comment I quoted about Counsell was a slap at Eckstein, too.

HA! I'm going around in circles with some other people about ANA based on the Repubilc article. If you look at the thread I created, you'll see that I don't believe that ANA succeeded with "small ball" and I actually believe it hurt them more than helped them. They succeeded with tons of rallys that scored a boatload of runs at a time. They succceeded with a bunch of 2B.

 

[RLakin]

Originally posted by RLakin
"Eckstein-esque" is also funny terminology since Counsell was playing the "Eckstein role" for the D-backs one year before Eckstein was doing it for the Angels.

Saw a stat that the Angels were 59-17 w/ Eckstein in the lineup. Pretty impressive. I'd like to see what the D-Backs record is w/ Counsell in the lineup.