The End of the Tracy Honeymoon

Last year Jim Tracy, manager of the Colorado Rockies, was named Manager of the Year in the National League. The reason was the incredible turnaround he helped to engineer after an 18-28 start under Clint Hurdle. The Rockies, after appointing Tracy, went 74-42 the rest of the way to finish 92-70 and make the playoffs.

This season, however, Jim Tracy's leadership has transformed into an altogether more sinister beast. After an ugly 9-5 loss to the Phillies tonight (following an ugly, but for different reasons, 2-0 loss in Los Angeles yesterday) the Rockies have fallen to 15-17. Better than last season, but far from the World Series contending start the team expected.

While I don't put a lot of stock in the importance of a good manager in baseball - it seems to me that good teams make good managers, not the other way around - it is the case that managers make a small handful of decisions which should be fairly straightforward. Beyond that, they also manage personalities, making sure the $10 million a year guys get along with the $1 million a year guys. Tracy is renowned for his ability in the latter category, and earned my admiration during last year's miracle turnaround on that count. His actual tactical ability has never impressed me, but I was willing to overlook it.

This season, however, things are different. I can't overlook the tactical when the personality side seems to be falling short as well. The story is that Hurdle lost the respect of his players by constantly juggling the lineup, but benching players for an 0-4 day, or starting inferior backups simply because they hit a homer the day before. The team became so much his, so little a team, that the Rockies had no choice but to axe him and to go with someone else. Tracy came in and provided a stable lineup, secure and well-defined roles, and, perhaps best of all, someone who wasn't Clint Hurdle.

Except now he's becoming Clint Hurdle. The Rockies lineup is different every day this season. Chris Iannetta was demoted to AAA (where he is, not surprisingly, tearing the cover off the ball while Miguel Olivo wracks up strikeouts and pop-ups) after a mere 8 games. Three different pitchers have already held the "closer" role in the absence of Huston Street. Eric Young, a natural second baseman, has repeatedly started in Left Field during Brad Hawpe's recent injury, while Seth Smith - a superior hitter and fielder to Young - has sat on the bench. I could go on.

I know the Rockies are dealing with injuries, and that tonight they were missing Tulo and Carlos Gonzalez, and that Greg Smith has to keep starting every 5th day in the absence of Jorge De La Rosa. But despite all that, despite the misfortune, Tracy is not putting his team in a position to succeed. There were two decisions from tonight's ugly, ugly game that baffle me, that scream "I don't know what I'm doing," that signal the official end of the honeymoon.

The first of these was an intentional walk of Raul Ibanez in the ninth inning. At the time the score was tied 5-5. Manny Corpas had hit Ryan Howard with a pitch, but had managed to get Jason Werth out. After a first strike to Ibanez, Corpas uncorked a wild pitch, allowing Howard to move up to second. With the count 1-1, Tracy ordered an intentional walk of Ibanez to bring up Carlos Ruiz instead. Now, Ibanez is left handed and Ruiz right handed, but both are slow, and Ruiz had a homer earlier in the game. What's more, Ruiz is off to an awesome start this year, and the aging Ibanez looks like his baseball playing days are wearing thin.

Of course, Ruiz smacks a single to left to bring in Howard, and Ross Gload follows with a three run home run to give the Phillies an insurmountable 9-5 lead.

Why not pitch to Ibanez, especially since the count was already 1-1? It's not like Manny threw a wild pitch on a 2-0 count, putting Ibanez way ahead. At 1-1, the at-bat is even, and if Manny gets a strike two across, he's way, way ahead. Why give up that strike? What's more, why give up a free baserunner? I know you don't want to give up any runs, but putting another runner on means that the Phillies have a better chance to have a big inning, which they did.

Sometimes the Ibanez walk works out fine, don't get me wrong. Sometime you get a double play out of Ruiz and go to work in the bottom of the ninth in a tie game. But why risk it? Why not try to get Ibanez out, and even on a grounder to the right side, you've got Ryan Howard - who's no track star - on third with two outs. Then you don't need a double play from Ruiz. Then you don't need to face Gload, or, if you do, you do with one fewer base runners. And yes, maybe Ibanez gets a hit, and Howard scores, but are your odds really that much better with Ruiz than with Ibanez? Are they so much better that giving up the free runner is worth it?

The second and altogether more frustrating decision occurred in the bottom of the 6th inning. The Rockies were, at the time, down by one run, 5-4. After Miguel Olivo and Clint Barmes not surprisingly both made outs, the pitcher's spot came up. Now, this is the 6th inning. The pitcher's spot is likely to come up once more - maybe twice - if the game goes nine innings. The Rockies have a short bench due to Tulowitzki's injury, but Ryan Spilborghs, Eric Young, Todd Helton, and Paul Phillips (the backup catcher in the absence of Iannetta) were still available.

And Jim Tracy sends up rookie pitcher Esmil Rogers to pinch hit.

Esmil Rogers.

I simply don't get it. Why? Why would you send up a starting pitcher - and not even your best hitting starting pitcher; Ubaldo and Cook are both better - instead of one of your bench players? Why? Even with no one on and two outs, what reason is there to give up on the inning? Why not send up Helton? If he draws a walk, you have Seth Smith - who had already hit a single, double, and triple in the game - up with a runner on first. That's good, right? Even with two outs you'll take one of your best hitters up with a runner on, right? Or send up Eric Young, so if he gets on you can try to steal a base and have a runner in scoring position.

It's all well and good to save your bench, but in this case the math doesn't work out. Four bench players (and lets be generous and make it three, since Tracy never never never uses his backup catcher) and two or three more at bats for the pitcher's spot. 4 (or 3) - 2 or 3 is not a negative number. Use your bench!!! This game ended with Eric Young, Todd Helton, and Paul Phillips unused, while Esmil Rogers ended with an 0 for 1. Unacceptable. Giving away outs does not win baseball games, and hitting a pitcher instead of Todd Helton is giving away outs.

Giving up free baserunners and giving away outs... It's bad enough that the Rockies are throwing Miguel Olivo's .290 OBP out there every day when they could have the .350 (or better) OBP of Chris Iannetta. It's bad enough that the Rockies haven't done anything to upgrade at second base, where Clint Barmes will surely put up another .290 OBP this season. It's bad enough that the Rockies have to rely on Greg Smith to start 1/5th of their games, and that Aaron Cook suddenly forgot how to throw strikes. It's bad enough that the Rockies are playing the Phillies when Carlos Gonzalez is in Venezuela and Troy Tulowitzki is hurt, and Todd Helton is taking a scheduled day off. All of that is bad enough. Much of that is not Tracy's fault.

But, as a manager, you have to get right the stuff that you can control, and Tracy isn't doing that. This is a team that's supposed to contend for the World Series, and tonight they looked like amateurs against one of their biggest competitors.

An Observation on Ryan Howard's Contract

The Phillies 5 year, $125 million contract for Ryan Howard doesn't even start until after his current deal ends in 2011. In all, Howard is signed until 2017. 2017 is a long, long time away. A lot changes in 7 years of baseball. Consider the 2003 Major League leaders in RBI, along with age at the time:

1) Carlos Delgado, Blue Jays, 31 - 145
2) Preston Wilson, Rockies, 28 - 141
3) Gary Sheffield, Braves, 34 - 132
4) Jim Thome, Phillies, 32 - 131
5) Albert Pujols, Cardinals, 23 - 124
6) Richie Sexson, Brewers, 28 - 124
7) Alex Rodriguez, Rangers, 27 - 118
8) Vernon Wells, Blue Jays, 24 - 117
9) Todd Helton, Rockies, 29 - 117
10) Brett Boone, Mariners, 34 - 117

Pujols is the only person in the top 10 in 2003 RBI that was in the top 10 in 2009. He is, in fact, the only person in the top 20 in RBI in 2003 still in the top 20 in 2009. He's joined only by Derek Lee and Alex Rodriguez in the top 30 in 2003 and 2009... You get the picture.

Ryan Howard also hits home runs, you say?

Similar list, 2003 HR leaders:

1) Alex Rodriguez, Rangers, 27 - 47
2) Jim Thome, Phillies, 32 - 47
3) Barry Bonds, Giants, 38 - 45
4) Richie Sexson, Brewers, 28 - 45
5) Javy Lopez, Braves, 32 - 43
6) Albert Pujols, Cardinals, 23 - 43
7) Frank Thomas, White Sox, 35 - 42
8) Carlos Delgado, Blue Jays, 31 - 42
9) Jason Giambi, Yankees, 32 - 41
10) Sammy Sosa, Cubs, 34 - 40

Again, Pujols is the only person in the top 10 in homers in 2003 still in the top 10 in 2009. He's the only one in the top 20 in each, and he and A-Rod are the only two in the top 30 in each.

Of course there's a lot of turnover in these kinds of lists, but it's worth noting that the people who are on both were 23 and 27 years old in 2003. Howard is already 29.

I suppose the question is, is Howard at 29 more like Pujols at 23 or A-Rod at 27, or more like Richie Sexson and Preston Wilson at 28? Even if he's somewhere in between - say, a Delgado or a Derek Lee - is he really worth $25 million?

Chris Ianetta, Miguel Olivo, and the Problem of Sample Size

Chris Iannetta's demotion today is far from the most disappointing news in Rockies-land recently, what with injuries to Brad Hawpe, Jason Hammel, and now Jorge De La Rosa, and, of course, the still shocking death of team President Keli McGregor. Nevertheless, Ianetta's demotion is troubling for the same reason that Seth Smith's continual lack of playing time is troubling. A franchise that is doing so much right in so many ways (a tip of the cap to McGregor, here, who was a huge part of the way the Rockies were built) continues to misunderstand sample size, player roles, and, in general, how to put the best nine players in the organization on the field each day.

I will not deny that Miguel Olivo is off to an excellent start. In his first 47 PAs this season, he's wracked up 14 hits, 5 of which have gone for home runs. He plays a competent defense, and his utter inability to draw a walk has so far not been troublesome. Even so, Olivo has 16 strikeouts to his 14 hits, and he has so far been incredibly lucky on those rare occasions when he's put the ball in play without hitting it out. In short, while he may be hitting .310 now, 47 solid plate appearances does not tell us more than years and years of incompetence at the plate. Olivo, for all the power he has displayed in his career, has a career high OBP of .292 (and for the batting average fans out there, his career high is .263, which is well above his career average of .244). Yeah, .292. As in, in his best season - last year - Olivo made an out an astounding 71% of the time he came to the plate. For a point of comparison, Ubaldo Jimenez - a good hitter for a pitcher - put up an OBP of, you guessed it, .292 last season.

Granted, Olivo hits more home runs than Jimenez, and is obviously a better hitter for that reason alone. There's also reason to believe he'll be boosted somewhat by playing half of his games at Coors Field, and he could very well launch 30 home runs this season if he plays regularly, even though he'll probably punch up a .250 batting average and an OBP under .300. It's worth noting that the Rockies already have a .290 OBP, 20-30 home-run hitting, strike-out machine in Clint Barmes (who is, at least, one of the better second basemen defensively in the league), why do they need Olivo to produce outs, too?

As for Iannetta, there's no denying he's off to a slow start, despite the walk-off homer he hit a little over a week ago. But do Iannnetta's 34 plate appearances really constitute a trend? For one thing, Ianneta has been unbelievably unlucky so far. Of the 17 balls he has put in play (non home-runs, strikeouts, or walks), a measly 2 have fallen for hits. In general, about 3 out of every 10 balls in play drop for hits, so with even average luck, Iannetta's putrid .118 average should be above .200, at least. And, as always, Iannetta's value comes from power and walks. He'll never be a .300 hitter, but last season, despite a .228 batting average, Iannetta's OBP was .344 (against the league average of .331). That is, Iannetta made an out a full 1% less often than the average hitter in the NL, and a full 5% less often than Miguel Olivo.

Even in 2008, when Iannetta produced a career high 18 home runs, along with a .264 batting average and a .390 (!) OBP, the Rockies have insisted on starting other catchers regularly. It is certainly beneficial to have more than one competent catcher, because the position is the most tiring in baseball, but as with Yorvit Torrealba, the Rockies are mistaking some mysterious intangible quality of Miguel Olivo's for actual skill and usefulness, and are relegating Iannetta to a backup and, now, minor league position. There is every reason to believe that Iannetta will not be a Sky Sock for long, but that he has been demoted at all suggests that Olivo will get the majority of starts throughout the year, even after he regresses to his usual, futile self.

What I haven't made explicit here is the difference in how I am understanding the numbers and how, apparently, the Rockies front office is. When I look at Olivo and Iannetta, I look at the last two or three seasons of their respective careers. There is no question, given those larger samples, that Iannetta is a superior player to Olivo in every way. I would wager that, given the chance to start regularly, Iannetta would even hit more home runs than Olivo (all the while posting a .350 OBP instead of a .290). But apparently that analysis isn't happening with the Rockies. They see 30 at bats for one player, 45 for the other, and are drawing conclusions from there not about who has been better so far - it's clear that Olivo has been - but who is going to be better moving forward.

One of the fundamental insights of sabermetrics has nothing to do with which statistics are better or which skills are repeatable and which luck. That insight is that baseball teams should make decisions based upon what they think is going to happen, not on what has happened before. The Philadelphia Phillies, in signing Ryan Howard to a 5 year, $125 million extension yesterday, are paying for what Ryan Howard has already done, not what he is going to do. There is little reason to believe he will be worth a $25 million salary when he is 36 years old, even if he potentially was when he was 27 or 28.

Likewise with the Rockies (though at much less cost): Miguel Olivo's hot start is a blessing, and there is no question he is a useful backup. But Iannetta is younger than Olivo, he has a significantly higher career OBP, and he has just as much power. There is every reason to believe that, moving forward, he'll be the better player. Even so, over any given sample of 40 at bats, Olivo might hit 5 homers and Iannetta hit .120. But, and here's the key, over most samples of 40 at bats, Iannetta is going to be the better player.