Posada Day-To-Day, Roster Moves Coming

Good morning Fackers. Last night, Jorge Posada's MRI revealed a minor calf strain. (Note: That is not Posada's actual MRI. We don't condone HIPAA violations here) He is day-to-day; just like you and me. Given this latest bump to go with last week's bruise, the Yankees will likely want another catcher around until Jorge is back to one hundred percent.

As such, I would expect the team will continue to go with just four outfielders for the time being. Rather than recalling Greg Golson or Chad Huffman, as had been rumored, the Yankees will likely add a third catcher when they send out their current eighth reliever.

Posada and Francisco Cervelli are the only catchers currently on the 40 man roster, so a series of moves will be required. Here's what to expect:

• Mark Melancon will likely be optioned down. Boone Logan, and to a far lesser extent David Robertson, are also candidates.


• Initially, Christian Garcia will be recalled. Garcia underwent his second Tommy John surgery last month and is out for the entirety of 2010. He'll immediately be placed on the 60 day disabled list, which will remove him from the currently full 40 man roster.


• Chad Moeller, who spent part of 2008 with the Yankees and is currently Jesus Montero's back up in Scranton, will have his contract purchased, adding him to the 40 man. He'll then be recalled to fill the roster spot vacated by Melancon/Garcia.

One other thing to consider regarding Posada's leg ailments: when he suffered the initial knee bruise last Wednesday, Baseball Prospectus' injury expert, Will Carroll, passed along the following, cautioning that Posada's injury could be a nagging one, and potentially cause subsequent problems:

Ben Wolf, a smart guy you'll be hearing from in the near future in this space, points out something about Posada getting hit by a pitch Wednesday that hadn't occurred to me: "Was reading your latest column and saw that Posada was hit in the fibular head (I had just read knee in the general news). Even if there isn't a fracture, there's a risk of the injury being more of a long-term problem if he ends up with any restriction in the superior tibiofibular joint, especially considering the demands of a catcher squatting on the knee (including that joint specifically I think), not to mention any mechanistic problems he could have running."

Last night's calf problem could just be coincidental, but it bears watching as the next several weeks unfold. The Yankees had to suffer through the majority of a season without Posada the last time Moeller was around. It's not an experience they, or any of us, want to repeat.

Baseball Prospectus Event At The Yogi Berra Center

Now for a public service message on behalf of the man pictured reading his autobiography to the above: The fine folks from Baseball Prospectus are putting on an event this coming this Sunday, February 28th from 3-5PM at the Yogi Berra Learning Center on the campus of Montclair State University in New Jersey. Kevin Goldstein, Christina Karl, Steven Goldman along with friend of the blog and mustache aficionado Jay Jaffe will be appearing in person to promote their 2010 annual and inevitably to field angry questions about PECOTA. It will be a panel discussion and the Yanks upcoming season will certainly be discussed in depth.

If you are in the Northern New Jersey area, consider checking it out and taking a stroll through the museum while you are there. For more information, call (973) 655-6891.

Yet Another Joba To The Bullpen Post

Good morning Fackers. As our Spring Training countdown will remind you later on today, it's just twelve more days until pitchers and catchers report. It's been a pretty interesting off-season all things considered, but every year, the flow of transactions and real news invariably slows to a drip. That leaves us prone to rumor and conjecture, and apparently "us" includes "real journalists" as well.

Wednesday, Joel Sherman dipped into the trusty old Joba-to-the-bullpen bag to conjure up a story with a new twist, proposing that the Yankees lean on their on their one through four starters, wave the white flag on the fifth spot, and place both Chamberlain and Hughes in the pen to create a lockdown relief corps.

I was willing to just let it slide for what it was - a baseless hypothetical proposal during the dead days of the off-season - but as with any Joba-to-the-bullpen story it inevitably had legs. Even at that, I was willing to the let the usual arguments - make-up, potential, the eight inning, the succesor to Mo, etc. - play out and let the story die.

But then Dave Pinto put forth an interesting and unorthodox proposal that I thought brought something new to the table: let both pitch out of the bullpen, but utilize them much like pre-LaRussian firemen, pitching multiple innings at a time. Theoretically, not only would it allow both to pitch enough innings in 2010 to leave them well positioned for starting roles in 2011, but it would give the Yankees a highly effective bullpen while allowing them to carry fewer relief pitchers. As a result, they would conceivably be able to have a better bench, whether it be with a third catcher, another utility infielder, a pinch running specialist, etc.

Pinto's proposal intrigued me for a few reasons. Firstly, I like these type of "outside the box" ideas that challenge prevailing roster construction ideas. Secondly, I love any realistic plan that results in an eleven - or even better a ten - man pitching staff. Thirdly, it reminded me of something I proposed two years ago, as to how the Yankees should best deploy Chamberlain for the 2008 season when 40% of the rotation figured to be Hughes and Ian Kennedy and all three had fairly restrictive innings limits.

That said, interesting as Pinto's proposal is, I don't think that 2010 is the time to try it with Chamberlain. The Yankees have handled him very carefully for the past three seasons to have him in the position he is now. He's primed to enter 2010 with no restrictions, capable of being a fully vetted starting pitcher for the entirety of the season. As such, the intrigue and potential fringe benefits of Pinto's proposal aren't enough to punt on the opportunity to just let Joba pitch this year. Yes, he was frustrating to watch for much of last year, but that's typical of any 23 year old pitcher, let alone one who's had Joba's hype and expectations heaped upon him. Let's see what he can do this year before we give up on the Joba starter project.

Hughes, on the other hand, presents a difficult case. Because of the way he was used last year, he will likely have a 2010 innings limit that proves restrictive. It almost assuredly wouldn't permit him to be a starter all season long, and there's no guarantee that there's a rotation spot for him anyway. But, if the Yankees utilize him strictly as a traditional set up man again in 2010, Hughes will be ill-prepared to assume a starting role in 2011. The organization has to find a way to get Hughes an appropriate amount of innings this year, and in his case Pinto's suggestion may have some merit.

In the end, Pinto's proposal won't happen. While I would like an extra position player or two on the bench, Dave Cameron had an excellent look Tuesday as to how filling the fringe of the roster with pitchers rather than position players is probably the better move. Further, in light of the recent extensions signed by Zack Greinke, Josh Johnson, Felix Hernandez, and Justin Verlander, both Rob Abruzzese at Bronx Baseball Daily and Joe Pawlikowski at RAB note the importance of the Yankees developing Chamberlain and Hughes as top flight starters of their own. Pawlikowski further notes that it's unlikely for a contending team like the Yankees to experiment with such a non-traditional technique. And if that's not enough water thrown on the fire, a "high level source" told Baseball Prospectus' Will Carrol there's "no bleeping way" both pitchers wind up in the pen.

Well, that killed two more days of the off-season. Just twelve more until we can move on to real news like who's "in the best shape of his life" and who's been on fire through two dozen at bats against replacement level competition despite years worth of sucking in the Major Leauges. It's not much, but it beats speculating about Joba to the pen or where Damon will land.

*No dead horses were harmed during the writing of this post

Hall Of Fame Triangular Table

If you aren't Hall of Famed out just yet, SportsCenter anchor and former Max Kellerman Show co-host Brain Kenny had Rob Neyer and Joe Sheehan (of Baseball Prospectus) on his radio show to discuss the results of the voting yesterday. They call it a roundtable, but there's only three of them.

It's just a quick 10 minute segment and although all of them are generally grounded in sabermetrics, there isn't any groupthink going on. Although I don't wade too deeply into the HoF discussions, I like the fact that everyone has a slightly different idea of who should be in.

SI Profiles Chapman

Good morning Fackers. I don't know about you, but I can't wait for the Winter Meetings to start up next week. It's getting to be pretty slim pickings out there for things worth talking about.

Two weeks back, I expressed some concern over the Yankees interest in Aroldis Chapman, based largely on the success - or lack thereof - of previous Cuban players. We followed that the next day with a some more Chapman content, including a scouting report from Baseball-Intellect.

Tuesday, Sports Illustrated ran an in depth profile on Chapman (Joel Sherman was upset about this, as he felt SI should have profiled Noel Arguelles instead). Again, perhaps it's more confirmation bias on my part, but the SI piece has made me more leery of Chapman.

Building on questions of character that arose from Chapman's decision to switch agents two weeks ago, SI talks about Chapman's first, badly botched, attempt at defection and refutes the story that his exclusion from the 2008 Cuban Olympic team was punishment for that. It also touches on his decision to defect just days before his daughter was born.

I'm hesitant to criticize Chapman's decision making process as it relates to his defection decisions. I don't know what it's like to live under a communist regime; I don't know what it's like wrestle with the thought of leaving friends and family behind for a lengthy stretch of time; I don't know what it's like to have the prospect of $50M contract waiting for me on the other side.

I am however concerned about the likelihood of Chapman being a successful Major League pitcher and worthwhile risk for the amount of money he's commanding. On top of the less than glowing scouting report from Baseball Intellect, the SI piece suggests that Chapman's exclusion from Beijing a year ago was performance based and not a punishment. It illuminates Chapman's alarmingly high walk rate in competition that generally features free swingers and generous strike zones. It points to Baseball Prospectus' Clay Davenport's projections of Chapman having a K/9 over 9, but an ERA over 6.50, and compares him closely to pitchers who are struggling to make it out of AAA. It features a quote from Chapman indicating that he isn't too willing to be anything but a starting pitcher.

None of this means that Chapman won't be or can't be successful. But all of it - for me at least - makes it all the more dubious that he will be. And it makes me just about certain that he's not worth the investment it would take to ink him to a deal.

The more I hear about Chapman, the more I'm reminded of the fabled Sidd Finch.

A Good Weekend, But Not Good Enough For Some

Rise and shine, Fackers. I know it's Monday, but the good weekend that was in Yankeeland should help soften the blow. They managed to get in all three games without so much as a delay despite a tropical depression lurking just off the coast in the Atlantic which prevented some complications later in the season. Although the Yanks struggled in their first meeting with the White Sox in Chicago, they swept this three game set and might have dealt the final blow to the Pale Hose' playoff hopes for this year.

After surrendering the lead in a dramatic 7th inning on Friday, the Bombers got a walk off, homer from Robinson Cano, with runners in scoring position, no less. Saturday played host to an offensive explosion and a stellar pitching contribution from the most unlikely of places. You can't tell just by looking at the final score, but Sunday's game was more similar to Friday's than Saturday's in that it was hotly contested. The Yanks held on tight until the bottom of the seventh inning and only after that did their offense finally take over.

In their past 9 games (dating back to the beginning of the Red Sox series), the Yanks have scored an average of 8 runs per game, which has allowed them to go 6-3 during that stretch against three teams that were all in Wild Card contention when it began despite allowing almost 6 against.

Steve at Was Watching, however, is not impressed. Yesterday, he noted that the Yankees are "only" 33-30 when playing a team with a record at or above .500 and even goes as far as to label the post "possible bad news". The point of the article was apparently to insinuate that the Yankees are doomed in the playoffs:

...but, I'm thinking ahead to the post-season, for the Yankees. And, there will be no Blue Jays, A's, Orioles, Twins or Mets for the Yankees to play in October. Most likely, New York will have to deal with Detroit or Texas in the ALDS and then face someone like the Angels, Red Sox or Rays in the ALCS (should the Yankees advance past the ALDS for the first time since 2004). And, that’s a horse of another color, no?

Well yes, the postseason is different than the regular season. But the rest of that argument? Yikes. Where to begin?

How about the fact that the Twins, who Steve lumped in with the "losing" teams, as a result of winning ONE GAME, are now at .500, swinging the Yankees record from 33-30 to 40-30 against these teams, which is now the best in the AL. So his post went from spurious to irrelevant in roughly 5 hours.

Just because it's listed in a column on Baseball-Reference doesn't make it a useful stat. Aside from the perfect example provided by the Twins above (which could have been prevented by removing their 0-7 record against the Yanks), there are plenty of good reasons not to take much stock in team's play against other squads with "winning records".

For one, the teams are divided based on their cumulative record for the season, which for various reasons doesn't always accurately reflect their strength at various points within it. For instance, the Yankees took 5 of the 6 games they played against the Mets this year, but going into that 6th game, the Mets were 37-36. Now, after putting $85M on the DL, they are a shell of their former selves and 13 games below .500 so it looks like the Yankees were beating up on a cupcake.

A while back, (actually while debunking a piece on WSJ.com that claimed having a losing record against teams over .500 was actually a good thing) we determined that the average winning percentage against teams over .500 is around .430. This means that an average team would be 27-36 against teams with winning records through 63 games. Using that as a benchmark, even the 33-30 Steve was working with is quite a healthy showing.

As we have more recently discussed, the fine folks as Baseball Prospectus have studied what makes a team likely to succeed in October and at no point was the team's record against opponents with winning records even factored into the equation.

For better or for worse, over the next month, more and more emphasis is going to be placed on the Yankees odds in the postseason. There will be countless theories proposed about why the Yanks are poised to return to World Series glory or be bounced in the first round. The truth is that there are a myriad of variables that will ultimately determine how they fare, and the most important one is luck.

About Those Chickens...

Jay Jaffe of Baseball Prospectus did not heed Matt's advice from this morning when penning this column for New York Magazine, applying BP's "Secret Sauce" for postseason success to this year's Yankees. The formula, developed by Nate Silver and Dayn Perry, isolates three key variables that have predicted team's outcomes in the postseason more accurately than others over the past 30 years:

They found that age and postseason experience had no effect on a team’s chances; surprisingly, they also found no significant correlation between any measure of team offense (including bunting and stealing) and postseason success. What they did find important were three measures of pitching and defense, which they called the “Secret Sauce”.

The best predictors of October glory are a pitching staff with a high strikeout ratio, a strong team defense and a solid closer. Since scoring is depressed in the postseason, it's valuable to have a pitching staff that avoids bats, a defense that can save runs and a closer than can lock down victories. Jaffe does a great job of explaining in detail why these factors increase in importance in the playoffs and concludes (emphasis mine):

None of this is meant to knock the offense, which has helped make them a near-lock for the playoffs. But it’s the Secret Sauce that bodes well for their chances once they get there. The last time the team made such a drastic leap in the Sauce rankings was 1996—which, fans will remember, was the end of their last excruciatingly long World Series drought.

Since Jaffe is a BP guy, he's not concerned with jinxes and is speaking in no uncertain terms because their odds have the Yanks' odds of making the postseason are at 99.4%.

The leap he's talking about comes mainly from a jump from 26th to 3rd in Fielding Runs Above Average and a big boost in K/9. The increase in strikeouts is obviously driven by the acquisitions of CC Sabathia and A.J. Burnett but the cosmic leap in defense is harder to explain. Even with Derek Jeter suddenly above average at short and Hideki Matsui, Jason Giambi, and Bobby Abreu out of the field all together it's hard to imagine the Yankees jumping 23 slots in that ranking.

Do I trust the rankings implicitly? No, but it certainly is encouraging to know that the Yanks have a team built for success not only in the regular season, but into October as well. Whether or not that translates into anything this year remains to be seen. Those are the chickens that Jaffe doesn't dare to count either.

Don't Count Your Chickens...

Good morning Fackers. And a good morning it is. The Yanks have just completed their longest road trip of the year, 10 games and 11 days worth of a pretty unfriendly travel schedule, and they have a 7-3 record to show for it. Not a bad trip.

While we usually bemoan off days in these parts, I'm alright with this one. It was a long trip, and as it always is, the three game set with Boston was likely as physically draining for the players as it was emotionally draining for the fans. Despite having had an off day just last Thursday, I'm sure this one is welcomed and well-earned.

I have two rules of thumb that I follow as it pertains to baseball standings. First, I don't pay much attention to the them until about mid-June. This gives the season some time to develop so one can get an idea of who's for real, and who isn't. Second, I don't consider a team to be in trouble until there are fewer weeks left in the season than they are games back in the standings.

The regular season ends six weeks from yesterday. The Red Sox are now 7.5 games back in the AL East (seven in the loss column). Given the history between the two teams and given what we've seen occur in Flushing the last two years, I'm by no means ready to declare the AL East race over. But despite the overall run differential for the series being zero, the Yanks went in and took two of three, accomplishing what they wanted to. While this series wasn't an emphatic sweep like the September 8-10, 2000 series or the August 18-21, 2006 series or even the fabled Boston Massacre of Septmber 1978, it should be enough to ensure that the Red Sox spend September more concerned about the Rangers and Rays than the Yankees. Baseball Prospectus puts the Yankees' chances of winning the division at 95.73%.

That said, the Sox are still a formidable team, as their offensive outputs Friday and Saturday illustrated. So before we go kicking dirt on their grave, let's remember that the weekend series against them in late September may not be the last the Yankees see of them in 2009. Until then though, we can't be anything but happy about how the last two plus weeks have played out.

Dueling Projections

I have taken considerable heat for my post on Nate Silver's A-Rod projections in our comment section and elsewhere. As always, here at Fack Youk, we subscribe to Benjamin Disraeli's quote "It is easier to be critical than right". As the result of some goading from a commenter named Fridas Boss at Baseball Think Factory, I have used some cutting edge statistical techniques to develop my own projection for how many home runs Alex Rodriguez will amass over the course of his career.

First, for the record, here are Nate's projections again (with A-Rod's past two years).

One thing I didn't notice before was that Silver's projection lasts two years beyond A-Rod's current contract. I'm going to go out on a limb here, but if A-Rod hits four home runs in 2017 and is at 726 total, I don't think the Yankees, or any team for that matter, are going to sign him.

-----

My method was extremely complex and exhaustive. Here are the steps I took.

1. Used the later years of Frank Robinson, Eddie Murray, Hank Aaron, Willie Mays and Babe Ruth to see, in total, how some of the greatest home run hitters of all-time have produced during their decline phases. I excluded Barry Bonds because of his atypical middle aged physical metamorphosis, despite the fact that he a A-Rod are both alleged PED users.



2. Combined that and A-Rod's previous totals to develop a trend line for doubles.



3. And for slugging percentage, factoring in his declining speed and the negative impact it will have on his SLG%.
   
   
4. Combined those three lines into a conglomerate trend line I called his Projected Power Index (PPI)



5. Estimated the ballpark effects of the New Yankee Stadium based on the prevailing weather patterns in April through September and the way it the diamond now faces.
   
   
6. Used all of these in conjunction with his previous home run numbers, taking into account his steroid use in Texas (increased production minus park effects) to create his Projected Home Runs (PHRs).



7. Decided all of that that would be way too difficult and possibly counterproductive, and instead picked the number "792" which would ensure that if he breaks the record, I will be closer than Nate by a couple of HRs. I then back-filled the numbers making sure there wasn't a drop off every single year since that was something I took issue with.



8. Behold:

One of the things I said in the last post, but probably should have emphasized more was:

I realize that the most reliable way to predict future outcomes is by analyzing past events. However, the flaw in using this methodology is that it becomes impossible to predict when someone will do unprecedented things. Simply put, how is analyzing 20 guys, none of whom is the career home run leader, ever going to result in the simulation predicting A-Rod will break the all-time record?

Commenter scatterbrian nailed it:

It seems futile to attempt projecting a career that is an outlier. Rodriguez had 91 extra-base hits in his age-20 season, so we're dealing with a pretty rare player as it is. (DiMaggio and Pujols each had 89 in their age-21 seasons.) Using guys like Grich, Caminiti and Sandberg as comps doesn't seem fair to Rodriguez. Combined those three have only four seasons with 30+ homers. Rodriguez has hit less that 35 just one time.

The point of an individual projection, at least to me, is not to produce a seemingly exhaustive and all-encompassing methodology. The objective is to be right.

PETCOA is obviously more complex and accurate overall than anything I could ever hope to construct. However, the point of the previous post was to call into question a method that is only going to produce one result: A-Rod falling short of the all-time home run record.

Silver's projection serves to remind us that A-Rod breaking Hank Aa-- er, Barry Bonds' record is far from a foregone conclusion based on pretty much every career path that has taken shape in the history of baseball. I just don't think A-Rod fits that mold.

Only time will tell.

-----

Oh and by the way, I made a similar projection for his home run totals this year, based on his performance in Spring Training. You probably won't believe it, but he is currently on pace for 162 HRs in 2009: A-Rod homers in first spring game [ESPN]

The Stolen Base: Fallen From Grace

With the advent of the Juiced Era and an emphasis on sabermetrics by front offices around MLB, the stolen base has declined in use around the game.

One of the most telling disadvantages of stealing bases is measured by the run expectation stat. Below is the run expectation chart for the 2003 MLB season (thanks to writer Joe Sheehan at Baseball Prospectus).


Based on this chart, a runner on first with no one out is worth .9116 runs. A successful steal of second base with no one out would bump that to 1.1811 runs, a gain of .2695 expected runs. However, in the unfortunate event that a runner is caught stealing second base, the run expectation stat drops to .2783. This is a loss of nearly 2/3 of a run (2.3 times more than the gain).

Why would managers risk this chance for a run and give up one of 27 precious outs? Unless it is late in the game and there is a need for a tying run, the batter is a ground into double play threat, or there is next to little chance that the batter at the plate cannot drive the runner in from first (i.e. low slugging percentage), it is stupid.

Horrible times to steal bases include early in the game, when you need multiple runs (baserunners are important) and when a big slugger is at the plate.

In his article, Sheehan points out that the belief that running distracts defenses is misplaced or exaggerated. Sheehan correctly states that "a runner on first is more disruptive to a defense, with the first baseman holding and the second baseman cheating towards second for a double play, than a runner on second." He also points out the distraction that running has on the batter. How many times have we seen a batter give up an out by flailing at pitches in the dirt so that the runner can advance? If the batter strikes out and the runner is thrown out, the run expectation goes from .9100 to .1083 in an instant.

Sheehan concludes that break even rate for a stolen base is a 75% success rate. Thus, players with less than a 75% success rate should not even attempt to steal. In fact, if your speed is your only asset and you have less than or barely a 75% success rate, you shouldn't even be on a roster (ahem, Scott Podsednik).

Stealing bases also presents injury risks. Why risk the injury of high-salaried slugger such as an A-Rod, Vladimir Guerrero or Alfonso Soriano? The benefit that these players provide at the dish is immensely higher than their base stealing benefits.

With the decline in Performance Enhancing Drugs and subsequently the decline in the number of home runs, it will be interesting to see if the number of stolen bases returns to 1980s levels when Rickey Henderson, Vince Coleman and Rock Raines ran wild. Having a few .390+ OBP/85+% SB guys can make a team lethal so long as they are in front of a few power hitters. However, as evidenced by the teams mentioned in Sheehan's article, teams shouldn't run just to run.

He Also Picked Mickey Rourke...

I'm a little late to the party on this one, but Nate Silver's projections of A-Rod's home run totals just don't look right. Here is his description of his methodology:

I took Rodriguez's top 20 PECOTA-comparable players and averaged their performances over each remaining season of their careers. Actually, the process was a little more complicated than that (each comparable's performance was adjusted for his park and league context, as well as his previous track record, and we had to make an accommodation for guys like Manny Ramirez who made A-Rod's comparables list but have yet to conclude their own careers). But the basic idea is simple: Comparables like Frank Robinson, who aged well, have a favorable effect on Rodriguez's forecast, and players like Caminini [sic] just the opposite one.

And here are the projections (I've added A-Rod's two previous seasons in white):

There are three glaring problems to me.

1. Silver predicts a near-linear decline, with each total being 2-6HR lower than the preceding year. This, of course, is the result you are going to get when you take his "top 20 PETCOA-comparable players" like Silver did. If you take any 20 players and average their careers, the total number of home runs is almost always going to decline with age. Increase the sample size and it will always decline. The only problem is, over that ten year period it is extremely unlikely that any individual player is going to have that consistent of a downward slide. I will bet anyone reading $100 that this doesn't happen to A-Rod. First one to take the bet in the comments is on, we can iron out the details later.
   
   
2. A-Rod is going to be able to DH at some point. Common knowledge would suggest that playing regularly in the field puts wear and tear on a body, draining energy in individual games and effectively shortening careers. Many of his comparables didn't have that luxury and were driven out of the league because they were no longer well-rounded players, not just because they could no longer be effective at the plate and hit home runs.
   
   
3. The problem with being on pace to be the greatest home run hitter of all time is that you aren't going to have too many people similar to you.

Here are Alex's 20 comparables (and their career HR totals):

1. Sammy Sosa (609)
2. Bobby Grich (224)
3. Dave Winfield (465)
4. Ken Caminiti (239)
5. Ryne Sandberg (282)
6. Frank Robinson (586)
7. Dwight Evans (385)
8. Jeff Bagwell (449)
9. George Brett (317)
10. Reggie Jackson (563)
11. Hank Aaron (755)
12. Greg Luzinski (307)
13. Albert Belle (381)
14. Reggie Smith (314)
15. Manny Ramirez (527, Inc.)
16. Carlos Delgado (469, Inc.)
17. Dick Allen (351)
18. Doug DeCinces (237)
19. Larry Walker (383)
20. Tony Perez (379)

Granted, PETCOA's comparables are based on a ton of things besides home runs, but the problem with this list is that A-Rod already has more HRs than 16 of the guys on it. He has twice as many as his second and fourth closest matches and his career isn't over. I know Nate is going to lean on his own projection system for a variety of reasons, but it would probably have made more sense to look at the top 20 career HR leaders. We are, after all, trying to predict how many home runs he is going to hit and he's already #12 on the list.

I realize that the most reliable way to predict future outcomes is by analyzing past events. However, the flaw in using this methodology is that it becomes impossible to predict when someone will do unprecedented things. Simply put, how is analyzing 20 guys, none of whom is the career home run leader, ever going to result in the simulation predicting A-Rod will break the all-time record?

Look what happens when you line up A-Rod's projections with Hammerin' Hank's:

For one thing, last year, A-Rod played in only 138 games. If he played 156 games, he was on pace for almost exactly 43 HRs, right in line with a 32 year old Aaron.

Where the big differentials come in, are from ages 35-39. As A-Rod enters his steady plunge into oblivion (98HR, 19.6/year), Hank checks in with 203 round-trippers (40.6 per year) including the highest single season total of his career (47 at age 37).

There's no guarantee that A-Rod will hit even one more home run. He could get struck by lightning tomorrow. I just don't think that Alex is going to take the field on a consistent basis and gradually slide off into oblivion like PETCOA projects. The truly eye opening part of Silver's projection is that he'll would still only be 33 HRs away from the all-time record even if he is as bad as the simulation predicts.

-----

Before you leave a comment telling me how much of a moron I am, I've posted my own projections here.