A STEALS EXPLOSION
I think we’re coming to a consensus that the new larger bases are not going to make much difference when it comes to stolen bases. The extra inches represent less than half of one percent of the distance between first and second base. I’m sure there will be a replay call that shows a difference was made, but the size of the bases isn’t going to change the game much.
What might change the game is the pitch clock and the limits on pickoff attempts. Baserunners should be able to take bigger leads and get better jumps when the pitcher has to stay in cadence and loses the leverage of multiple throws over. But how does this affect the fantasy game?
If all baserunners increased their SB output by the same amount it wouldn’t change fantasy prices at all. The value of all stolen bases would decrease and the relative value of players would stay the same.
But what if the effect isn’t distributed evenly? What if the fastest runners steal more and the less frequent runners stay the same?
I took my 2022 player pricing sheet and increased the number of steals by players who stole more than 15 bags in 2022 by 10 percent. All the other hitters I kept the same. I recalculated the prices and three players, Jon Berti, Jorge Mateo, and Cedric Mullins, increased in value by $1. One single dollar.
And no batter decreased in value by a dollar, which with rounding is really 51 cents. Why?
Because if all the runners who steal the most steal more then the value of steals will also be devalued, just as if everyone was running more.
The lesson here isn’t that there won’t be players who gain value because they run more. Not everyone is going to increase their SB production by 10 percent. But the overall effect on prices of a jump in stolen bases by a broad range of players is not going to be as great as some are anticipating.
And it doesn’t help figure out how this plays because Berti and Mateo both have playing time risk built in.
CLEVINGER PAN
A long-time reader wrote to me yesterday after I sent out the newsletter:
I’m disappointed in you, Peter, for labeling a guy who was accused of some terrible things, not the least of which was spitting tobacco on his baby, as a “Pick.”
MLB not disciplining him likely has more to do with their lack of subpoena power and/or the idea that his wife may have recanted her accusations after deciding that seeing him in jail would cost their family the $20+ million he signed for.
I know there are other disturbing individuals in baseball but, given the horrific nature of these accusations, including physical assault, not to mention the lying episode that saw him jettisoned out of Cleveland shortly thereafter, I can’t imagine a better opportunity to pan a player.
I wasn’t surprised by this. I had given my PICK of Clevinger some thought. I decided to go ahead because MLB had investigated the accusations and decided no disciplinary action should be taken. I’m sure I’m being a bit naive in trusting that MLB would do the right thing, but it has been my impression in recent years that MLB has done a better job of doing the right thing in these sorts of cases.
Of course, I could be wrong about that. But that’s my impression, and so my take on Clevinger yesterday was that he hadn’t exactly been cleared (MLB offered social/mental support to him and his family) but that the specific and awful accusations were not true. MLB doesn’t have suppeona power, but it also doesn’t have as high a burden of proof as a court to initiate a penalty. So, apparently off the hook, Clevinger wasn’t going to be suspended, he was going to pitch more, and there is the chance that he’ll pitch better the second year after TJ, so this was a buying opportunity. A PICK.
On the other hand, I don’t know if Clevinger is innocent or if he escaped penalty on a technicality. He was seriously scolded in Cleveland in the summer of 2020 (when there was a pandemic on and no vaccine) after he and Zach Plesac went to a party with some of Plesac’s friends. When asked about it by team investigators, Clevinger lied. Teammates were very critical, he put them all at risk without letting them know, and he was soon traded to San Diego, where his season would end with Tommy John Surgery.
So, the point, as the reader pointed out, is that Clevinger’s character is in question, he was charged with bad stuff, and he heedlessly lied when a person with character would either not have transgressed or owned up to what he did when asked.
From this situation I have two points:
First, MLB not disciplining Clevinger this year means that he is clearly not the worst, though he may be bad, but he is a buying opportunity for fantasy players. It isn’t our responsibility to roster only players with good character, or perhaps better said, it is not a moral blot for fantasy players to roster players who are morally repugnant. We’re not supporting their bad lifestyles, we’re not endorsing the bad behavior, we’re spearhunting for stats wherever we can find them. That’s the game.
Second, for the fantasy writer and for fantasy players, being silent about repugnant behavior is a moral blot. So my making Clevinger a PICK was tone-deaf and a mistake. It was unnecessary, I could have pointed out the buying opportunity without getting cute about it, and irresponsible, since I have no idea how dark things go with Clevinger. Maybe a little, maybe a lot, I don’t know.
I will roster Clevinger if the situation comes up. I’ll roster Trevor Bauer if the opportunity arises. Roberto Osuna? Bring him on. We should talk about these guys, we shouldn’t forget or hide it, and maybe they will learn something and do better, maybe they’ll make amends and the dark clouds under which they’ve operated might lift a bit.
That’s the way it should work, isn’t it?
I’LL SECOND THAT EMOTION
TOP TIER
Photo: All-Pro Reels from District of Columbia, USA
I’m always higher on Ozzie Albies than others are, so be aware that in CBS and LABR he went for $29 and $26. He doesn’t work many walks, but he puts the ball in play with situational power and he runs, making him a whole package of skills rather than a standout in any one. I’d be as comfortable this year with him as I was last year, that is until the lights went out. Jazz Chisholm went for $34 in CBS (always high on top players) and $26 in LABR). He’s the guy here who could break out in a big way because of his power and speed, but he’s also a guy who missed a bunch of last season with back issues and had knee surgery in September to repair his meniscus. Not a big deal, but now he’s moving to center field, more wear and tear, and it’s probably a good idea not to go overboard. There is some injury risk here. Jose Altuve looked as if his running game was over a few years ago, but he’s bounced back in remarkable fashion. I can’t say this is the year he stops bouncing, he’s looked great this spring, but the bouncing eventually slows and stops for all. It just does.
Tommy Edman and Andres Gimenez aren’t in the same class as those other guys, but they’re head and shoulders ahead of the rest of this year’s second base class. Edman is solid and a good source of steals after most of the big runners are gone, but the situation in St. Louis is crowded. Gimenez might be special. Some of last year’s step up was good BABIP, but some of it was improving his launch angle and hitting the ball harder more often. A defensive plus already, don’t let him slip through.
THE TEENS
Keep reading with a 7-day free trial
Subscribe to Rotoman's Guide to keep reading this post and get 7 days of free access to the full post archives.