The math behind the need for depth

[Docwaukee]

An above average offensive team will get about 6200 plate appearances per year.  

I don't know the major league avg for the top 9 PA's so I'll use the halos for the last few years because it's applicable at least in part as to how injuries, days off and performance will impact that average.  

For the last 5 years it's about 450 PA per player.  Or about 4000 PA total.  

Which means that about 1/3rd of your PA come from players that aren't in your starting 9.  

That's 2000 PA.  Or lets call it 5 players averaging 400 PA each.  

Even if you have a very unusual season where all 9 of your starters don't lose at bats due to poor performance and very little due to injury and occasional days off, you're talking about probably around 1200 PA.  So even in an ideal situation you're still gonna have 3 guys getting 400 PA.  

So we're going to go into the off season and potentially into 2023 with question marks in LF, 1b, 2b, SS, 3b, and C.  

I don't think it's fair to compare the Angels to monster payroll teams like the Yanks, Dogs or Mets in terms of how they're able to create depth.  

But Atlanta might be a good comp assuming a reasonably healthy Rendon next year and if so, Trout, Ohtani and Ward combine to cancel out their top four of Swanson, Riley, d'Arnaud, and Harris.  They combined for about 20 WAR.  I think our top 4 can do that.  And even if the Halos top four don't quite get there, it's less important for what I'm trying to show here.  Because, let's be honest.  If injuries, or poor performance keep that from happening (again) the offense really only has a chance of being solid at best and probably about average.  

But let's look at the rest.  

Outside of their top 4 for WAR, they had 10 other guys with 140 or more at bats.  Those 10 guys accumulated 8.5 WAR.  The remaining 292 PA came from 9 guys for a total of -1.5 WAR.  

To keep things even, I'm excluding Rendon.   The Angels had 10 guys with 150 at bats or more outside of their top 4.  And accumulated 2.1 WAR.  The remaining 19 players had 886 PA.  For a total of -4.2 WAR.  

The Atlanta offense and defense is at 27 WAR and in 7th overall in mlb.  17 WAR higher than our current level.  About 7 of that currently is the delta between our top 4 and theirs.  So how do we come close to making up that additional 10 WAR from the offense.  

That's a lot of ground to cover.  First off, the reason we have -4.2 WAR in 889 PA is because of poor performance from the 10 above that.  So if those next ten perform more capably, you can make up about 2.5 of that from just addition by subtraction. 

So the other 7.5 has to come from those other 10 guys.   

You can't put the team in the position to get -1.6 WAR from 1b, -0.9 WAR from C, 0.5 WAR from 2b, 0.8 WAR from SS (not as bad as I thought because of defense), 0.1 WAR from LF.  But there's no way you can make that up merely through a better bench.  

Backup C upgrade is easy.  Rengifo and Fletcher can make up some ground at SS and 2b.  Especially if you get a SS and Fletch becomes one of your bench guys.  But where you're gonna get most of your bang for your buck in the starting lineup is at 1b and LF.  And frankly, those are likely to be the least expensive of all the positions needed AND spots that are much more easily backup with bench depth.  

And considering where this team is at from a timing standpoint, can you wait for Adell to turn a corner or for Walsh to rebound?  I just don't think you can.   Teams can get by with 0 wins from C and even limited production from another spot such as SS.  But not from -1.5 WAR combined from both LF and 1b.  

So in the end we need about a 3 win delta from 1b, 2 win delta in LF, about 1 win from C, about 2 wins from 2b (which I think we already have) which gets us there and if you can grab a couple of wins from the bench (more addition by subtraction), it's not entirely crazy to think we could go from a bad offense to a good one or at least one that's decently above average.  

[eligrba]

Great write up. 
 

I wonder what this type of analytical approach would have revealed if done at the end of last season?

[Brandon]

I love these math based position outlooks and am on board. However, Doc always gets me excited with these and gets me optimistic and the team manages to outperform the math from a poor perspective.

[Angelsjunky]

Title says "math" and 95% of the forum looks elsewhere.

But good work, @Docwaukee. As you point out, or at least imply, some of the improvement has already happened via Rengifo and Fletcher. Some will come via improvement (hopefully) from Walsh and LF, and some will come through replacing all the shitty <100 PA performances from guys like Rojas and Villar and Mayfield, and a bunch of other guys. Meaning, replace a dozen shitty guys with a handful of decent guys. I mean, this is just absurd.

Now of course the fact that you posted this and I'm chiming in probably doesn't bode well. See "2015-22: Common Traits Among Posts By Dochalo and Angelsjunky, Particularly During the Offseason."

[jsnpritchett]

6 minutes ago, Angelsjunky said:

Title says "math" and 95% of the forum looks elsewhere.

But good work, @Docwaukee. As you point out, or at least imply, some of the improvement has already happened via Rengifo and Fletcher. Some will come via improvement (hopefully) from Walsh and LF, and some will come through replacing all the shitty <100 PA performances from guys like Rojas and Villar and Mayfield, and a bunch of other guys. Meaning, replace a dozen shitty guys with a handful of decent guys. I mean, this is just absurd.

Now of course the fact that you posted this and I'm chiming in probably doesn't bode well. See "2015-22: Common Traits Among Posts By Dochalo and Angelsjunky, Particularly During the Offseason."

I would argue that it's not the math itself that causes some people to look elsewhere: it's how the math is written about.

[Angelsjunky]

2 minutes ago, jsnpritchett said:

I would argue that it's not the math itself that causes some people to look elsewhere: it's how the math is written about.

[jsnpritchett]

4 minutes ago, Angelsjunky said:

Not really.  In-depth posts that deal with complex statistical analysis and/or involve a lot of math (even if it's basic math) but are written in a conversational style will get more readers and buy-in than those that are drier or more academic.

[Angelsjunky]

2 minutes ago, jsnpritchett said:

Not really.  In-depth posts that deal with complex statistical analysis and/or involve a lot of math (even if it's basic math) but are written in a conversational style will get more readers and buy-in than those that are drier or more academic.

Yeah, I know. Just messing around, Jason.

[Warfarin]

2 hours ago, Docwaukee said:

 

Backup C upgrade is easy.  Rengifo and Fletcher can make up some ground at SS and 2b.  Especially if you get a SS and Fletch becomes one of your bench guys.  But where you're gonna get most of your bang for your buck in the starting lineup is at 1b and LF.  And frankly, those are likely to be the least expensive of all the positions needed AND spots that are much more easily backup with bench depth.  

And considering where this team is at from a timing standpoint, can you wait for Adell to turn a corner or for Walsh to rebound?  I just don't think you can.   Teams can get by with 0 wins from C and even limited production from another spot such as SS.  But not from -1.5 WAR combined from both LF and 1b.  

Right, exactly, and that's why there's room for optimism about this team's future.

Our weakest spots are arguably the easiest and cheapest to fill.  A solid LFer and 1B are not hard to find, and given their general surplus on the market, it should not be too hard to remedy that.

Beyond LF/1B, I agree that C and the middle infield need some help.  The long-term outlook for those positions is promising - O'Hoppe, Neto, and perhaps Paris all hold varying degrees of promise.  Fletcher, when healthy, is a very good defender who, even if he doesn't hit much, provides a lot of value as a regular 2B.  And, at the very least, Soto has perhaps added an intriguing option to keep an eye on.  He has looked surprisingly good in his limited debut - perhaps a (promising) sign of an improved ability of our new front office's ability to develop young talent?

[Docwaukee]

1 hour ago, Angelsjunky said:

Title says "math" and 95% of the forum looks elsewhere.

But good work, @Docwaukee. As you point out, or at least imply, some of the improvement has already happened via Rengifo and Fletcher. Some will come via improvement (hopefully) from Walsh and LF, and some will come through replacing all the shitty <100 PA performances from guys like Rojas and Villar and Mayfield, and a bunch of other guys. Meaning, replace a dozen shitty guys with a handful of decent guys. I mean, this is just absurd.

Now of course the fact that you posted this and I'm chiming in probably doesn't bode well. See "2015-22: Common Traits Among Posts By Dochalo and Angelsjunky, Particularly During the Offseason."

You and I tend to write those optimism math pieces after the dust has settled and try to convince others and ourselves that what the team has done adds up to a winning season.  I purposefully didn't do that here.  Yes, we have some built in things that should improve the team but I would like to put a great deal of emphasis on the word should.  

Adell should get better
Fletcher and Rengifo should improve the middle infield
Walsh should be better.  Maybe not 2021 better but not nearly as bad as he was this year.
Rendon should be healthy and he should play in way more games
Ward should provide similar production.
Stassi should be better (how could he not be).  

It's the gm's job to cover his basis on some if not most of these.  He has to do a better job of figuring out what he can get away with and what he can't.  

So there is an opportunity.  And that's what I'm pointing out.  There was an opportunity to do this last year as well.  As I pointed out.  And it was an abject failure of catastrophic proportions.  

If we walk into the year with the above and a bench of Thaiss, Soto, Moniak and Duffy, I will not be optimistic.  

[Docwaukee]

1 hour ago, Warfarin said:

Fletcher, when healthy, is a very good defender who, even if he doesn't hit much

I have a feeling that Fletch would be the SS if we don't get someone else.  And being a SS decreases his value a bit.  Which is why I really hope we can get a SS.  But of the 4 really awful position performances, SS seems the most obvious to completely leave along.  C we need a solid backup which should also be pretty straightforward.  Although I would have thought the latter as obvious in the previous off season and we ended up with Suzuki.  

LF and first base will give the most bang for buck.  We were second to last in WAR for both of those positions this year.  

[BTH]

I think a big key is just eliminating below-replacement level production.

Gosselin, Suzuki, Walsh, Wade, Rojas, Villar, Lagares, Mayfield, Adell, Sierra, MacKinnon, Aguilar, Duggar, Wallach, Whitefield, Stassi, and Stefanic have combined for -7.1 fWAR in 2000 plate appearances.

But in order to do that, you can't just cycle through more minor league free agents or players off waivers. Rather, you need to sign average to above-average players at your positions of need. That'll help slide guys like Fletcher, Rengifo, Walsh, and Stassi into complementary roles.

Also, you need to anticipate regression. If a 1.5-2.5 WAR player regresses, they're still likely gonna be worth 1 WAR. If a 0.5-1 WAR player regresses, they're likely gonna be worth 0.0 WAR or worse.

[stormngt]

1.  They will not give up on Walsh yet.  He was too good last year and this year in April and May.  They should find a platoon partner who could play multiple positions.

2.  Unless you are the Dodgers, Yankees, or Mets can't pay premium players unless you have young, cheap players to fill out the rest of the roster.  We have Trout, Ohtani, Rendon, and most likely a starting pitcher with premium contracts.  That means the Angels are not going to sign a middle infielder with Fletcher, Rengifo,  and now Soto producing like they are. 

3.  Rendon can't can't be relied upon to be healthy but he will be marked in as starting 3B.

4.  They are not giving up on Adell

What they really need is vertical players that can produce offensively and play multiple positions.

*sign a starting Outfeilder who can play both LF and RF.  Have Walsh play RF and platoon 1B with Walsh.

*sign a middle infielder who can hit and either Fletcher or Rengifo could back up 3b in case Rendon goes down again

*Thaiss might be an option because he can plY 3b, 1b, and has shown to be a competent back up C.  However, could the Angels rusk another bad offensive year from Stassi?

Off season needs:

1. Two players who help offensively.   One needs to play infield the other needs to play outfield 

2. Starting pitcher

3. Bullpen

 

[Warfarin]

6 hours ago, Docwaukee said:

I have a feeling that Fletch would be the SS if we don't get someone else.  And being a SS decreases his value a bit.  Which is why I really hope we can get a SS.  But of the 4 really awful position performances, SS seems the most obvious to completely leave along.  C we need a solid backup which should also be pretty straightforward.  Although I would have thought the latter as obvious in the previous off season and we ended up with Suzuki.  

LF and first base will give the most bang for buck.  We were second to last in WAR for both of those positions this year.  

Really, I think the pathway to best improving the team's offense would be the following:

1.  Sign a LHH LF - several options, including Pederson, Gallo, etc

2.  Sign a 1B if the FO feels Walsh will not recover or recapture his previous form

3.  Sign a legit SS, which pushes Fletcher to 2B and Rengifo into the "super utility" role.  This won't happen for multiple reasons (no payroll space to accommodate, we just drafted Neto who will likely be our SS in 1-2 years), but this is probably the pathway to remedying multiple issues - Fletcher would be a solid player, given his strong defense at 2B, Rengifo would greatly strengthen our bench, and of course, we'd have a good SS instead of having to trot out Velazquez.

Still - 1 and 2 can be easily done, at least.

[Docwaukee]

9 hours ago, Trendon said:

I think a big key is just eliminating below-replacement level production.

Gosselin, Suzuki, Walsh, Wade, Rojas, Villar, Lagares, Mayfield, Adell, Sierra, MacKinnon, Aguilar, Duggar, Wallach, Whitefield, Stassi, and Stefanic have combined for -7.1 fWAR in 2000 plate appearances.

But in order to do that, you can't just cycle through more minor league free agents or players off waivers. Rather, you need to sign average to above-average players at your positions of need. That'll help slide guys like Fletcher, Rengifo, Walsh, and Stassi into complementary roles.

Also, you need to anticipate regression. If a 1.5-2.5 WAR player regresses, they're still likely gonna be worth 1 WAR. If a 0.5-1 WAR player regresses, they're likely gonna be worth 0.0 WAR or worse.

For Stassi, I don't see him moving into a complementary role in 2023.  I think they'll sign a decent backup and it's just wait for Ohoppe.  

I prefer Fletcher going into the super util role and Rengifo as the starter at 2b.  But the SS market is either go big or go after a kinda meh player and I really doubt they're going big.  

What they do at 1b is going to be very interesting.  They better go out and get a solid 1bman or have a really strong backup if they let walsh attempt to return to last years form.  

To me, regression means 'to their mean'.  No one on the offense was really due to 'regress'.  It's just that they had a bunch of player that weren't very good.  If we anticipate regression for 2023 it actually means they should expect better things from Walsh and Stassi.  So regression in the statistical sense doesn't always mean you assume they could get worse than they've been.  

So I see it as you just have to cover your basis on guys who have huge variance.  Or could have huge variance.  Based on the track record of guys like Stassi, Walsh, Adell, you just have no idea of who they're going to be next year.  And since this is Rengifo's first good year, you can't just assume he's gonna perform at the same level or get better - especially with a 3% walk rate.  

Where they should have anticipated regression is for Loup and Tepera.  And they better anticipate it for Herget.  

[stormngt]

8 hours ago, Warfarin said:

Really, I think the pathway to best improving the team's offense would be the following:

1.  Sign a LHH LF - several options, including Pederson, Gallo, etc

2.  Sign a 1B if the FO feels Walsh will not recover or recapture his previous form

3.  Sign a legit SS, which pushes Fletcher to 2B and Rengifo into the "super utility" role.  This won't happen for multiple reasons (no payroll space to accommodate, we just drafted Neto who will likely be our SS in 1-2 years), but this is probably the pathway to remedying multiple issues - Fletcher would be a solid player, given his strong defense at 2B, Rengifo would greatly strengthen our bench, and of course, we'd have a good SS instead of having to trot out Velazquez.

Still - 1 and 2 can be easily done, at least.

Still feel best platoon with Walsh would.ne Ward.   Right handed outfielder who can play RF.  Ward plays RF against righties, first against lefties.

[TempeAngel]

14 hours ago, stormngt said:

They will not give up on Walsh yet.  He was too good last year and this year in April and May.  They should find a platoon partner who could play multiple positions.

 

My concern with Walsh as a platoon player moving forward is that he really struggled against RHP's this year - .660 OPS. Last year he crushed them - .994 OPS.

I am hoping they find a way to upgrade at 1B. It needs to be a plus position.

[Stax]

I am bullish on Livan Soto, he will be the starting short stop.  David Eckstein came out of nowhere and became the Angels starting short stop and so did Andrew Velazquez.

[BTH]

1 hour ago, stormngt said:

Still feel best platoon with Walsh would.ne Ward.   Right handed outfielder who can play RF.  Ward plays RF against righties, first against lefties.

why not just leave Ward in RF and get a right-handed hitting 1B to platoon with Walsh?

[TempeAngel]

I would be disappointed with Minasian if Walsh is in the mix next year. Time to upgrade.

[stormngt]

2 hours ago, TempeAngel said:

My concern with Walsh as a platoon player moving forward is that he really struggled against RHP's this year - .660 OPS. Last year he crushed them - .994 OPS.

I am hoping they find a way to upgrade at 1B. It needs to be a plus position.

Economic realities.  Nothing is a guarantee.  Most thought Pujols was going to be above average 1b for Angels.   

Unless you are the Yankees, Dodgers, or Mets we cannot have expensive contracts on every position.  That's a fact.  Walsh had one great season and great ball in April and May.  His rookie year is probably not a fluke.  He is also cheap.  Whoever we sign at 1b (your option) is going to be expensive and probably have the same odds of success as Walsh.

That is why I argued having a good offensive player be a back up at 1b.  Like Ward.

[stormngt]

1 hour ago, Trendon said:

why not just leave Ward in RF and get a right-handed hitting 1B to platoon with Walsh?

You could.  If the Right handed 1b can play other positions.  We only have soany players on the roster, and we need an Outfielder who can hit, an 3b who can hit, and probably a catcher.