Around the AL West in January

In 2011, the Boston Red Sox will face AL West opponents 36 times, accounting for more than a fifth of…

2011 Projections: Jacoby Ellsbury

Jacoby Ellsbury 2011 projection: Last season was a lost one for emerging speedster Jacoby Ellsbury. After fracturing four ribs early…

Is It Okie Dokie for Okajima?

Something happened to Hideki Okajima last season.

Actually, two things happened to Okajima last season. First, his BABIP went through the roof, catapulting to a shocking .357. Second, his plate discipline indicators all took slight hits, which compounded to create a major deficit in his strikeout and walk rates.

Whether this was the cause of back and hamstring injuries or an overall decline is up for debate.

In fact, Rob Bradford has a great take on the subject over at WEEI.com that is well worth the read.

(http://www.weei.com/sports/boston/baseball/red-sox/rob-bradford/2011/01/01/can-okajima-rebound-tracing-his-decline-and-p)

Before getting into a more protracted analysis, I’ll take the liberty of discussing some of Bradford’s finer points. In the article, Bradford breaks down Okajima’s fastball struggles at length, citing his failures at locating the zone, his struggles with BABIP against righties, and a dip in velocity.

While I concur with most of his points, the single critique I have is the role of fastball velocity and overthrowing on his location struggles. After reviewing the statistics in the article, he didn’t seem to have greater problems with location during pitches with increased velocity compared to those at lower velocities. Okajima’s batting average against righties didn’t seem to have a noticeable rise when dialing up the fastball, nor did it seem as if he located the pitch any worse.

That said, my interpretation of the evidence leads me to believe that overthrowing didn’t have much to do with Okajima’s struggles.

Other than that, I agree with all the other major points. In particular, I throw my support behind the idea that Okajima’s command problems were at the root of his struggle in 2010. Considering that Okajima is a low-velocity hurler, he may have been at greater risk of a regression should his location go in the tank.

The primary advantages of velocity are that it gives a pitcher room for error in the strike zone while putting pressure on hitters to make their secondary pitches more effective.

Though there is no definitive study confirming this theory, there is evidence to suggest that it may have effects on BABIP. In addition, it makes sense that, at low velocities, we may see an increased negative effect of lost location. There is a wealth of knowledge that shows the effect of location on BABIP.

Theoretically, if a pitcher threw at high velocity, they would be able to these location-related hits via whiffs, inducing pop-ups and opposite-field fly balls, or by weaker contact.

If a pitcher threw at low velocities, they would not be able to avoid these location-related whiffs.

Theoretically, they would not be able to induce these pop-ups, opposite-field fly balls, or weaker contact.

Theoretically.

Could this have happened to Okajima?

Probably.

More importantly, however, was it the injuries, age-related decline, and/or a temporary, BABIP-sample size glitch?

If I were to put money on it, I would blame the off-year on the injuries and sample size discrepancies. However, injury has always been another word for age-related decline, so the two go hand-in-hand.

That said, the BABIP issue probably has something to do with the injuries. While it always seems impossible for sabermetricians to admit that BABIP is anything other than luck, I, for one, believe that pitchers -- at the very least -- have the ability to negatively affect their BABIP.

Location is a major contributing factor for hitter’s BABIPs, so it makes perfect sense that a pitcher who struggles with location would post a high BABIP. Hamstring and back injuries would affect a pitcher’s release point, which in turn would affect location. If Okajima was having problems locating a mediocre fastball, he would certainly qualify among those at high-risk of posting a high BABIP.

As is usually the case, everything is interrelated and we arrive at the conclusion that all three factors were at play. Okajima is getting older, which makes him more susceptible to injury, which will decrease the effectiveness of his pitches.

If this analysis is correct, Okajima should be able to bounce back -- as long as he is healthy.

Perhaps the one nagging problem I have with this analysis is that there is the possibility part of Okajima’s command issues were by design.

Specifically, this has to do with the fact that Okie had a large increase in O-Swing percentage this past season, rising from 24.6 to 31.8. Many pitchers who see an increase in their O-Swing will also throw more pitches out of the zone, because hitters are chasing. Therefore, it is plausible that Okajima was missing the strike zone because of approach, not because of injuries or general ineffectiveness.

While this would debunk the theory of injury being the prime mover in Okajima’s regression, it would not change the bottom line. In fact, it would be just as easy to rebound from -- if not more so.

As for projections for next season, that’s where it gets a little discouraging. Having posted a 4.50 ERA and 0.0 WAR -- not to mention a favorable rebound forecast -- one would expect a big recovery for Okajima.

Unfortunately, we see quite the contrary. If Okajima were to recover all his lost zone percentages (while losing his O-Swing gains) and BABIP losses, he would still be expected to post just a 4.15 ERA.

Why only a 0.35 gain in ERA against 2010? According to our numbers, Okajima was supposed to have posted a 5.013 ERA last season with a 6.93 K/9 rate and 3.469 BB/9 rate.

In other words, Okajima should be good enough to hold down a middle relief job, but won’t be the late inning stalwart he was in 2007 and 2008. Expect a WAR of about 0.5 and expect a lot of lefty work.

Top 10 Red Sox January Transactions (Since 2000)

December 2010 was a brilliant month of fireworks and good feelings when the Red Sox signed Carl Crawford — this…

No LOOGY? No Problem

Baseball has become a game of specialized players, especially when it comes to the bullpen. The bullpen is so specialized…

Around the AL East in December

BALTIMORE ORIOLES Although they may be just a 70-win team, the attitude is already better in Baltimore with new manager…

A Closer Look at Matt Albers

For all the pain he has caused Baltimore fans in the past few years, it raised a few eyebrows when the Sox inked Matt Albers 10 days ago.
The soon-to-be 27 year-old has endured a relatively rocky Major League career, posting a 5.11 ERA over 317.3 IP. Totaling just 1.3 WAR over a five year career (not to mention a 1.38 K:BB ratio), he doesn’t seem to fit the mold of a Red Sox’ middle reliever.
Nonetheless, there are plenty of reasons to be bullish on Albers, as the righty has a rather intriguing skill set that suggests better performances to come.
While Albers is no stud in the strikeout department (note the 82.8 percent contact rate), his primary and overarching skill is the ability to induce ground balls. Posting a 28.9 percent fly ball rate last season (and 32.3 percent over his five-year career), Albers has been able to control the damage when he is on the mound.
Preventing home runs is often one of the less expensive traits on the free agent reliever market, as many teams have a tendency to overspend on inferior pitchers who generate more strikeouts.
Albers is one of those types, as his ground ball rate is what separates him from being AAA fodder. For example, if we hold Albers’ 2010 peripherals steady, but raise his fly ball percentage to 45 percent -- a rate typical of a fly ball reliever -- his expected ERA would rise from a useful 4.394 to a damaging 5.011. Without a low fly ball rate, Albers becomes less than ordinary very quickly.
Perhaps the one reason to be cautious about Albers is that his upside is limited. Lacking swing-and-miss stuff, as well as a tendency to lose his handle on the strike zone, Albers will often teeter on the edge of replacement level in any given season.
Of particular concern is his very low zone percentage, which stood at just 38.3 percent last season. While some of that was certainly by design (as evidenced by his 30.6 percent O-Swing rate), it bears watching for the upcoming season. Hopefully, Albers can raise his zone percentage into the mid-40s, while keeping his O-Swing in the upper 20s. If he is able to select his chase pitches more effectively, he may be able to cut his walk rate under 4.00 per nine, while dropping his ERA into the low 4.00s.
One last point of concern about Albers has to do with a factor of his performance that holds a bit of uncertainty. When running through his projections, I arrived at two slightly different conclusions regarding his 2010 expected ERAs. The first result of his expected ERA, the number I often quote, yielded a 4.255 expected ERA.
However, when standardizing for his expected strand rate, Albers fared worse, projecting a 71.8 percent strand rate (compared to an actual rate of 69.1 percent). This strand rate produced an expected ERA of 4.533, right in line with his actual ERA of 4.52.
Unfortunately, much of the reason to be optimistic about Albers has to do with the first ERA projection of 4.25. On the other hand, I am still in the process of gathering data to create a more reliable strand rate evaluation, so there is room for interpretation. Of note, in the studies I have conducted, starting pitchers have almost no control over their strand rate, while relievers have shown a good amount thus far. However, without a concrete reason for this discrepancy, I will seek to acquire more data.

In the end, there is no reason not to be excited about the Red Sox addition of Matt Albers. Besides the possibility of latent improvement, Albers has compiled just three full years of service time, allowing the club to keep him under control through 2013. Steady, cost controlled relief pitching is always a welcome commodity, and Albers adds some flexibility in this department for the next couple years. He’s not a sexy acquisition, but depth is often what separates the contenders from the wannabes.
Just ask the 2010 Red Sox.

The Value of Tim Wakefield in 2011

This has been a busy offseason for the Sox (understatement). The additions of Adrian Gonzalez and Carl Crawford have transformed…

The Red Sox Have Always Liked Lenny DiNardo

He’s bounced around with a handful of teams and of course we all remember him as a Rule 5 pick…

2011 Projections: Dustin Pedroia

Dustin Pedroia 2011 projection: AB AVG OBP SLG OPS HR R RBI SB 644 .300 .373 .477 .850 15 112…