Mike Lamb hits 50 games

by Jon Marthaler on Jun 4, 2008 1:15 PM EDT in By the Numbers Comment 25 comments

With last night's loss to the Orioles, Mike Lamb has officially hit the 50-game mark - the point at which the Twins cut Tony Batista loose in 2006. Batista had 195 plate appearances that season; Lamb has a very comparable 187 so far this year. And here's the tale of the tape:

	BATISTA	M. LAMB
BA	.236	.247
OBP	.303	.283
SLG	.388	.335
HR	5	1
RBI	21	24
Runs created	24	23
OPS in last 20 games	.685	.707
BA with RISP	.318	.432
BA on balls in play	.276	.266
Line-drive percentage	21.9%	18.2%
RZR at 3B	.602	.587
Out-of-zone plays made	15	14
Fielding errors	3	2
Throwing errors	3	2
Contract	1yr /$1.25m	2yr /$6.6m

Apart from the salary - and the contract length - there's really no difference between the two. Still, the fiscal reality of his contract probably precludes the Twins from cutting their losses and ditching Lamb; I suppose the best-case scenario is for the team to play him only against right-handed pitchers, or keep him around to pinch-hit against righties and back up at the corner positions.

In 2006, I remember the Twins' DFA-ing of Batista as a move that was viewed with celebration, not to mention relief, among Twins fans. And so I remain somewhat confused why no similar movement is afoot regarding Lamb.

0 recs | Comment 25 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

The difference

The left side of the infield-Batista and Castro-was the most glaring problem on a troubled team laden with high expectations. Remember all the hype about the M&M boys?

Lamb is not the most glaring problem on an overachieving team with low expectations. The bullpen has a guy named Juan Rincon in it, who last was good before we signed Batista. The starting staff has a guy named Lian Hernandez, who last was good the year Batista was DFAed. The starting shortstop is a guy named Nick Punto, who has one good season in his professional career, the year he replaced Batista out of desperation.

"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot

by cmathewson on Jun 4, 2008 1:34 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Interesting Punto fact

Punto’s OPS in 2006, after taking over as the starting 3B: .709
Tony Batista’s OPS in 2006: .691

There’s no doubt that Punto was better defensively, his OBP (.340 vs. .303) was higher, and he also led the league in headfirst slides and scrappiness or whatever. But still, that’s not the super-duper improvement that everybody remembers.

by Jon Marthaler on Jun 4, 2008 1:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Batista was near-historically awful at third base, though

Really, really, really awful. Probably more of a liability than Manny is in LF. Sometimes you can make great strides just by moving from terrible to mediocre.

As for Lamb vs. Batista, no doubt the reason that Lamb isn’t getting criticized as much is that:

1) Gleeman isn’t leading the charge
2) Lamb does have a bit better track record than Batista had going into ‘06
3) Mainly, Lamb hit lights out with RISP in April, when he was really terrible at the plate, and that tends to be what fans will remember

Lamb showed better numbers in May than he did in April, so there’s a chance that he was playing through an undisclosed injury or something that maybe has cleared up. And Gardy has started using him as a platoon player. I’m okay with that arrangement for now. Still, I really want to see improvement out of Lamb at the plate.

by ubelmann on Jun 4, 2008 2:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Lamb's defense

Is Lamb’s D better than the numbers attest? I haven’t seen enough games to know for sure, but his RZR is pretty horrific, at the very least.

"There are only two things that are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." - Albert Einstein

by BeefMaster on Jun 4, 2008 3:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

His D probably isn't as bad as his RZR says...

...but he’s certainly not a good defender. He has below average range and a weak arm. Just how far below average is tough to say, but overall his D is below average.

by ubelmann on Jun 4, 2008 6:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Track record

I think that saying Lamb has “a bit better track record than Batista had going into ‘06” is a gigantic understatement. Lamb has OPS’d at 820 or better in three of the past four seasons. Batista spent the year before he came to the Twins playing in Japan, and not particularly well.

It was fairly easy to see why Batista was struggling. He was old, overweight, washed up, and never all that good in the first place. It’s much more difficult to decipher what is wrong with Lamb.

by Nick N. on Jun 4, 2008 5:08 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

In 2006...

...PECOTA projected Batista’s VORP to be -0.2. (Based on his track record, of course.) This year, PECOTA projected Lamb’s VORP to be 4.1. That’s not exactly a huge difference.

And if Batista was too old in 2006, then it’s pretty easy to point at Mike Lamb’s age as a reason for decline, considering that Batista was 32 in 2006 and Lamb is 32 now.

Lamb’s raw OPS in the recent past looks good, but Houston was a hitters’ park and Lamb was platooned a lot. Batista’s career OPS+ is 92 compared to Lamb’s career OPS+ of 95.

I would argue that Mike Lamb was never all that good in the first place and has declined some this year. PECOTA had him at a 39% collapse rate and a 30% attrition rate, so it’s not like a huge drop-off should be all that shocking, either. Lamb’s line drive rate is up to about where it was last year, but his power is totally MIA. He’s been around 10-12% HR/FB the last three years, but this year he’s at a Tyny 1.5% HR/FB. And without those home runs, his value goes way down.

Maybe it’s just that Batista was fat so it was easy to accept that he was done. I don’t know. But so far this year, Lamb has the worst VORP on the team and he’s certainly not a positive on defense. I can’t say that I’m very enthusiastic about his future.

by ubelmann on Jun 4, 2008 6:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Quite a difference

Hitting with RISP is something that should never be overlooked. There are a lot of things that could be looked at, but he has positive numbers in “win probability,” which only three other Twins have (as for hitters). I always think about when players hit and get walks, not how often. Lamb’s hits have been arguably very big, and he always seems to be on base late in the game, either by walking or slapping a single. Additionally, he usually gets the ball in play. TB used to fan at the worst moments. Mike Lamb will hit .270 is my prediction (with 4-5 home runs).

"I don't think it's nice, you laughin'. See, my mule don't like people laughing. He gets the crazy idea you're laughing at him. Now if you apologize, like I know you're going to, I might convince him that you really didn't mean it . . ."

by Skippy tastes better than Jiff on Jun 5, 2008 3:49 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Livan

Whether anyone wants to admit it or not, Livan is still 6-3 while the Twins are 9-3 in his starts. He’s had a few bad outings, but his only purpose is the save the bullpen and he has done way more than that.

Lamb has recently been heating up (read: Lamb has recently been facing a lot of right-handed pitchers) so people are disregarding that problem. Lamb has also gotten several clutch hits for the team, whereas Batista and his whacky batting stance creating nothing more than laughter.

Is Nick Punto the starting shortstop? I really would like to the think it is Harris, but you may be correct.

Anyone else think Everett gets DFAed sooner rather than later? I’m pretty sure Casilla has stolen his spot on the roster.

by joeiscool12 on Jun 4, 2008 1:44 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Man… I suck at typing.. I should really re-read things before I post them here.

by joeiscool12 on Jun 4, 2008 1:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

The middle infield

I was under the same impression, that Harris was the new starting shortstop – Gardy appears to be comfortable with his D there, especially since he no longer has to turn DPs, and Punto is still the utility man. A quick check of the recent starting lineups shows that Harris has started there for about two weeks straight, interrupted by one game of Punto.

As for Everett, if they’re thinking of DFAing him, my guess is that they are doing their best behind the scenes to try and get someone to take him off their hands when he comes off the DL (either for a no-name prospect or salary relief) rather than just ditch him, and I’d guess they’ll keep him on the DL as long as possible for that reason.

"There are only two things that are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." - Albert Einstein

by BeefMaster on Jun 4, 2008 2:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Punto

A quick check of the recent starting lineups shows that Harris has started there for about two weeks straight, interrupted by one game of Punto.

Punto was on the disabled list and has been battling a sore hammy since he came back. Once he’s healthy, I suspect we’ll start seeing his name scribbled in at SS with some frequency.

by Nick N. on Jun 4, 2008 5:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Gardy said as much

If Punto hadn’t tweaked his hammy on Saturday, Harris would have been relegated to the bench. Now, Harris’s role is that of Macri: right-handed platoon for Lamb.

"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot

by cmathewson on Jun 5, 2008 9:13 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

.302/.340/.407 in May

He’s got momentum now. But at the end of April I was having a lot of “what’s the difference” thoughts too.

by TMW on Jun 4, 2008 2:01 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Exactly...

My point was going to be about the trending… Lamb struggled in April adjusting to a new team, a new league, playing in the Dome, etc., excuse, etc., but he definitely picked it up in May.

I don’t want to look it up, but I really think that Batista went the other direction.

by SethSpeaks on Jun 4, 2008 4:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

The numbers

Lamb had a .522 OPS on May 22. He then went through a seven-game stretch, through the end of May, when he went 12-30 with two doubles, two triples, and a homer, raising his OPS to .635 and making his May stats look pretty good.

So was that hot streak representative, or were the previous 40 games representative? Time will tell, I guess.

by Jon Marthaler on Jun 4, 2008 4:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

OPS Rising

Sounds like a horror movie…

Anyway, if we’re measuring his rise in seasonal OPS:

End of April: .486
After game, May 11: .556
After game, May 22: .519
End of May: .640

So there were some ups and downs all month…that’s baseball. But the trend is moving in the right direction.

If the argument here is what you brought up initially-how is Lamb, when performing similarly if not worse than Batista, not in as much hot water-I get where you’re coming from. But I don’t think there’s an argument to be made about Lamb’s OPS in May, because it was more than that seven-game stretch….even if it was the largest catalyst.

by Jesse on Jun 4, 2008 5:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

The argument

My initial point – why is Lamb not getting more stick for his failure-itude? – is really the only one. I know he’s been better lately, but I still think he should be taking more heat, even if he had an okay May, highlighted by one really good week.

by Jon Marthaler on Jun 4, 2008 6:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Fair enough.

I have to be honest—I hadn’t realized he had been as bad as Batista…or worse, as the case may be. I blame the Atlantic Ocean.

by Jesse on Jun 4, 2008 7:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Lamb > Batista

The money definitely makes the Twins less likely to give up on Lamb but I think it’s worth pointing out that Lamb has quite a bit more range then Batista had at third. Granted Lamb’s arm is week but overall his range is much better then I thought it would be when we signed him. I’m not saying he is (or is going to be) a gold glover, but I think his defense is plausible if he can get the bat going. Speaking of about getting the bat going, he’s been driving the ball a lot better the last couple weeks so I think he’s going to be just fine.

by armadillo44 on Jun 4, 2008 2:06 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Defense

Lamb’s range factor: 2.66
Batista: 2.57

Lamb’s RZR: .587
Batista: .602

Lamb’s plays made out of zone: 14
Batista: 15

I don’t see any evidence that Lamb is a better fielder or has more range than Batista.

by Jon Marthaler on Jun 4, 2008 4:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I think it's more about the situation and expectations...

Batista was an experiment where the Twins hoped he’d bring a high-end return on power. That didn’t happen, and considering his salary he was a pretty easy decision to let go, especially considering how poorly the Twins were doing at that point.

With Lamb, we brought in a guy in the hope that he’d be able to fill in for a couple of years…and all things considered, Lamb was a much smaller risk than Batista. In spite of his slow start the Twins are still looking for an answer at third base into next year from him, and that salary makes it difficult to consider another option. Additionally, the Twins are still in pretty good shape as a team in spite of his slow start. If the Twins were 10 games under .500, it’d be a different situation.

by Jesse on Jun 4, 2008 4:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

With Lamb

With Lamb, there is legitimate hope that he’e better than this. With batista, it was pretty clear we were getting what we paid for.

"You can't sit on a lead and run a few plays into the line and just kill the clock. You've got to throw the ball over the damn plate and give the other man his chance. That's why baseball is the greatest game of them all."
~ Earl Weaver
"In God we trust. All others must provide evidence."
~ Billy Beane

by AdamOnFirst on Jun 4, 2008 7:33 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Well

Well, that and the fact that the many of us who were screaming before the season started that Batista would be terrible had the satisfactory of being proven right and continuing to talk about it. Not many people thought Lamb would suck for sure.

by AdamOnFirst on Jun 4, 2008 7:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

almost agree

but lamp is currently 2nd in the AL with runners in scoring position. so in the clutch, he does come through more than the average batter. part of the frustration with hitters who don’t hit is when they get out in key situations. that doesn’t happen as much with lamb as a normal .250 hitter, or really the vast majority of AL hitters, and why, i think, there’s no “similar movement” afoot.

lamb is obviously not the answer. but i don’t see a viable alternative, either.

by halona on Jun 4, 2008 10:51 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs