CSS Button No Image Css3Menu.com

Baseball Prospectus home
  
  
Click here to log in Click here for forgotten password Click here to subscribe

<< Previous Article
Under The Knife: Pleas... (04/23)
Next Article >>
Premium Article Checking the Numbers: ... (04/23)

April 23, 2009

Milton the Magnificent?

A Feat As Yet Unaccomplished

by Christina Kahrl

the archives are now free.

All Baseball Prospectus Premium and Fantasy articles more than a year old are now free as a thank you to the entire Internet for making our work possible.

Not a subscriber? Get exclusive content like this delivered hot to your inbox every weekday. Click here for more information on Baseball Prospectus subscriptions or use the buttons to the right to subscribe and get instant access to the best baseball content on the web.

Subscribe for $4.95 per month
Recurring subscription - cancel anytime.


a 33% savings over the monthly price!

Purchase a $39.95 gift subscription
a 33% savings over the monthly price!

Already a subscriber? Click here and use the blue login bar to log in.

When the Cubs signed Milton Bradley, there were all sorts of reactions-enthusiasm for what the switch-hitting slugger might provide in terms of lineup balance, but also concern over whether his particular brand of charm would play well before the well-suds'd legions in the stands. While we're already being treated to seeing both sides of that particular proposition as far as the costs and benefits that come with employing the almost reflexively-labeled "mercurial" Milton, rational observers wondered whether a player with his spotty track record for staying healthy would be able to repeat the brilliant comeback campaign he had DHing for the Rangers in 2008. Not only was he being paid at a level that reflected a happy faith that he could, he was being challenged by the Cubs to try and repeat that level while also rising to the challenge of playing right field regularly in the DH-less National League.

Since its inception, arriving at DH during a career has been something of a professional end point-setting aside the extreme defensive indifference of someone like Dave Kingman, it's where players go towards the tail end of their careers, and usually because of one kind of incapacity or another. Say, the knees of Harold Baines or Andre Dawson, or the bum wings of a Don Baylor or a Hal McRae, or acquired reps for all-around fragility that pushed Paul Molitor or Edgar Martinez toward one-dimensional greatness.

With time comes change, of course. We can readily recognize that we're at a point in the game's history where playing deep into your thirties isn't all that unusual, assuming a certain skill in the first place. Contributing to that longevity is the ever-improving prowess of the game's training staffs and the advancements in sports surgery. Surely that might suggest that Bradley's going to be better able to handle everyday play in the outfield in what is only his age-31 season, right?

Well, maybe, but if we instead use history as our guide, the track record isn't exactly replete with recent success stories of hitters who moved from regular DH duty to regularly playing a position, let alone a spot in an outfield corner. Let's start out with what Bradley did last year: 97 games at DH, and 20 in the outfield. Let's use that very number of games, 97, to generate a standard for basic regularity, and use that for both the year as a DH, and then for the next year as a fielder as well. How many players have been able to do that?

Using this standard and going back to the inception of the designated hitter for the 1973 season, it has happened exactly 13 times, and twice by a single player. In 1977 and 1978, we get an initial pair-Eddie Murray and Jim Rice were regular DHs for the Orioles and Red Sox (respectively) in '77, which might seem strange to us today because Murray was a 21-year-old rookie while Rice was a young veteran but only 24. In each instance, established veterans-Lee May in front of Murray, and Carl Yastrzemski giving the Monster one last go-were getting spins at their favored spots, and the '70s were hip to experimentation when it came to young people doing new things. Their career paths prefigure similar roads taken by Frank Thomas in 1991-92, Albert Belle in '92-93, and Carlos Delgado in '96-97. Since all were young hitters at the outset of their careers, this doesn't really help us much when it comes to Bradley.

After Murray and Rice, Don Baylor was the next player to make this kind of shift, going from 102 starts at DH in '78 (plus 39 in left and 17 at first) to 97 starts between right and left and 65 as the DH for the division-winning Halos in '79. He did the latter as a 30-year-old; he would also revert to DHing for the balance of his career from there on out, making just 84 more starts as a position player over the remaining nine years of his career. In contrast, Greg Vaughn was given a shot as a regular DH by the Brewers in '95 as a 29-year-old to rest his bum shoulders; he didn't hit well as an everyday DH, so the Brewers pushed him back out to left in '96.

We have the more recent examples of Mike Stanley ('98-99) and Rafael Palmeiro's double dip ('99-00 and '03-04) of peregrinating between first base and DH; both were veteran players who were being adapted as their teams shifted personnel, and both would DH and play first, because they were still in the American League. Also working with the benefit of staying with the same team in the same league are Matt Stairs' move from DHing for the '98 A's to starting for them in right field in '99, and Raul Ibanez going from regular DH duties with the Mariners in 2005 to playing left almost every day in '06. If you've noticed something about Stairs' feat, you should-he is the only player to go from regular DH work in one season to regular work at a position other than first base or left field in the next.

With the minor exception of Vaughn's trade to the Padres in '96 for their stretch drive, these 11 of the 13 all had the benefit of staying in the American League. In other words, none of them did what Bradley's going to have to-go from regular DH work in the AL to regular position-playing work in the NL. That's something only two players have ever been asked to do, and both were first basemen: Al Oliver, moving from DH duty with the Rangers in 1981 to starring at first base for the Expos in '82, and Jack Clark's escape from the Yankees after DHing for them in 1988 to go back to first base for the Padres in '89. That was 20 years ago.

Which leaves us with some pretty thin gruel as these things go: since the institution of the DH rule in 1973, we effectively have just two players who have made the jumps from DHing in the DH league to playing a position in the senior circuit, and we have exactly one player who has made the jump from DH to right field-Matt Stairs, not someone anybody confuses with the concept of defensive excellence-in that same stretch of time. As much progress as has been made keeping players healthy late into their careers, we're left with Bradley's status as a player taking on a unique challenge, and that's without getting into his managing just 245 starts in the field over the last four seasons, and not a single 100-game season in which he wasn't a full-time DH. If he can do that, he'll have accomplished a new testament to the skill we've been waiting to see since his debut a decade ago.

A version of this story originally appeared on ESPN Insider Insider.

Christina Kahrl is an author of Baseball Prospectus. 
Click here to see Christina's other articles. You can contact Christina by clicking here

Related Content:  Dh,  The Who

12 comments have been left for this article. (Click to hide comments)

BP Comment Quick Links

Bogomil

"We can readily recognize that we're at a point in the game's history where playing deep into your thirties isn't all that unusual, assuming a certain skill in the first place."

Besides MLB training/medical staff, elevated compensation permits players to improve conditioning year-round via uber-trainers, nutritionists, therapists and prescriptionists. Plus, superior coaching and specialization at lower levels permits younger players to arrive with habituated skill sets. Fields are better kept (except during football season in Oakland) & defense is much, much better these days.

But don’t these changes undermine the one unique premise of PECOTA? Are Bob Horner and Bobby Murcer comps to Evan Longoria meaningful or merely whimsical?

Apr 23, 2009 10:31 AM
rating: 0
 
Shkspr

Of course not. PECOTA doesn't care how you got to where you got, it just cares that you got there. If it took Evan Longoria year-round conditioning to perform in a manner consistent with Horner and Murcer, that's fine, assuming that Horner and Murcer did not radically change their level of conditioning at this stage of their careers and Longoria doesn't change his. If we have evidence to the contrary, then next year Longoria's performance will diverge from those two comps, and hew closer to one of the other 98 or so people that make up his projection. Remember, PECOTA's much more robust than just naming Milton Bradley the next Ken Singleton (his #1 comp). It's pulling a range of projections from all over baseball history. Some of them are recent, some are not, and the more unique a ballplayer is, the wider the variance anyway. If you put a gun to my head, I'd go with Chipper Jones as the guy on the comps list Longoria's most likely to emulate, with a nod to Eric Chavez. Surely you'd consider those comps meaningful?

Apr 23, 2009 11:16 AM
rating: 1
 
Bogomil

Yes, I would consider Longoria's contemporaries a useful comparable.

But I don't see the usefulness of comparables reaching back generations because of the stark differences. Its fine to say if Longoria doesn't match-up in 2009, Horner and Murcer will be downgraded as comps, but that misses the point that the 2009 projection contained their influence in some proprietary way. In fact, their downgrade or disappearance in 2010 would support the idea that the primary reason for resemblance in the 2008 PECOTA run may be happenstance.

I don't really know the granular aspects, but the conceptual approach (Bob Horner should inform a projection for Evan Longoria) is difficult to accept.

Apr 23, 2009 14:22 PM
rating: 0
 
DavidK44

The point is that you are looking to how a player played against his contemporaries for forecasting future performance. That year round training is a part of baseball culture now is just one of many differences.

The point is, Longoria had certain isolated power, walk rates, speed rates, that, when compared to his era, adjusted for other factors, compare generally to certain other players. Then, how did those other players do?

Even though it was a different era, if history has shown us that 23 year old third baseman who produce an isolated power rate 10% better than average, walk rates 5% better than average, and speed scores 25% below average typically see a very strong decline in 2 years, even if that history is drawing from the 1960s and 1970s, it is useful for predictions.

Yes, there are differences now and then, and yes there may be individual reasons, that's why PECOTA tries to use as many comparable as possible - hey, for all we know, Horner may have worked out more than Longoria does.

And also, I believe, though am not positive, PECOTA favors more recent comparables. It's built into the system - essentially, an incredibly similar player just 2 years ago is the best comparable, but an incredible similar player 30 years ago and a relatively similar player 2 years ago are given approximately equal weight.

But you'd have to talk to the BP pros for the exact details.

Apr 23, 2009 19:24 PM
rating: 0
 
DavidK44

I also in no way meant to say that Longoria's scores are those I listed, I was creating an example. I also did not mean to say that PECOTA only uses isolated power, walk rates and speed rates to establish comparables. Just trying to prevent any confusion.

Apr 23, 2009 19:26 PM
rating: -1
 
TGisriel

If Ken Singleton is Milton Bradley's #1 comp, PECOTA is clearly not taking a player's character and class into consideration.

Apr 23, 2009 14:43 PM
rating: -2
 
strupp

CK, fragility aside, the one thing I notice upon reading this article is that none of the players on the list played a tough defensive position (save molitor & edgar who had more severe injury problems thant even Milton. Do we know what effect this will have on the experiment?

Apr 23, 2009 10:34 AM
rating: 0
 
Robert Flaxman

Not that right field is the single toughest defensive assignment in the game, of course - I mean, if the Cubs are willing to throw Hoffpauir out there, they must only have so much concern about how it plays, at least balanced against the potential bat. With that said, Bradley looked awfully slow yesterday, and while I recognize that he's still healing from that groin tweak, it's not like he has a rep for often being fully healthy, so he may well look like that for most of the year. And even I could probably catch 75% of balls hit within 20 feet of me.

Apr 23, 2009 11:38 AM
rating: 0
 
beerd90210

Al Oliver won silver sluggers 3 straight years (ages 33-35) at 3 different positions, OF, DH, 1B. 2 AL, 1 NL. that's pretty cool. and he wasn't cheating - for someone with that... er... flexibility he really only played those positions those years.

Apr 23, 2009 12:05 PM
rating: -1
 
zlionsfan

Who's this Andrew Dawson guy? Doesn't ring a bell. :)

It's too bad that there aren't more examples of players moving back to OF ... there is a lot of speculation about the effects of being a DH, but there's so little data to examine (as this article partly illustrates) that it's hard to draw any meaningful conclusions about the position.

Apr 23, 2009 13:39 PM
rating: -1
 
strupp

Well, without looking or thinking TOO hard about it, i'm assuming Hawk's DH days were after he was a Cub, and I KNOW his knees were shot by that time, and wasn't exactly covering a lot of ground in RF by the last years there.

Apr 23, 2009 15:03 PM
rating: -1
 
eighteen

Dollars to doughnuts the information in this column is news to Jim Hendry.

Apr 24, 2009 09:07 AM
rating: -1
 
You must be a Premium subscriber to post a comment.
Not a subscriber? Sign up today!
<< Previous Article
Under The Knife: Pleas... (04/23)
Next Article >>
Premium Article Checking the Numbers: ... (04/23)

RECENTLY AT BASEBALL PROSPECTUS
Fantasy Article Fantasy Freestyle: Two American League Outfi...
Premium Article What You Need to Know: Your Meats and the Ro...
Premium Article Transaction Analysis: Help Me, Rusney, Help,...
West Coast By Us: We Were Told Not To Come H...
Premium Article Baseball Therapy: When Was the Sabermetric R...
Premium Article Monday Morning Ten Pack: May 26, 2015
Premium Article Minor League Update: Games of May 22-25, 201...

MORE FROM APRIL 23, 2009
Premium Article Prospectus Today: Schedule Strength
Premium Article Checking the Numbers: Inside Pitch-f/x
Under The Knife: Please, No Mauer (Catching)
Premium Article Wait 'Til Next Year: Trawling for Prospects

MORE BY CHRISTINA KAHRL
2009-04-30 - Transaction Analysis: The Mess in the West
2009-04-28 - Premium Article Transaction Analysis: Updates from the Easts
2009-04-27 - Premium Article The Mariners Matter?
2009-04-23 - Premium Article Milton the Magnificent?
2009-04-16 - Premium Article Transaction Analysis: NL Roster Roundup
2009-04-10 - Premium Article Leading Off
2009-04-10 - Premium Article Transaction Analysis: AL Roster Roundup
More...


INCOMING ARTICLE LINKS
2009-12-18 - Premium Article Transaction Action: Playing Milton Bradley G...
2009-10-01 - Premium Article Transaction Action: Winding Down the NL
2009-09-21 - Premium Article Prospectus Today: Bradleygate?
2009-05-01 - Premium Article Game Story
2009-04-24 - Premium Article Prospectus Hit List: Senior Circuit Surprise...