Twinkie Town: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Sports blogs for fans, by fans.
Around SBN: Uga VII, Requiescat in Pace: A Tribute to a Damn Good 'Dawg

Ponson Vs Ortiz

Is there a lesser of two evils?

The only reason my teeth are leaving deeper marks in my fingers on this acquisition in comparison to the Ponson pick up is because of the money involved and style of contract involved.  If Ramon Ortiz had signed a minor league deal like ol' Sidney, worth a similar bankroll, I could at least be able to say "yes, I understand why you would do this".

But therein lies the rub--Ortiz is no more valuable than Ponson.  Certainly $3.1 MM is better than the GNP of a country that was spent on something called Gil Meche, but that doesn't make it right.

Since the Twins, and indeed many organizations in baseball, will be hesitant to hand three starting slots to four guys with less than 300 combined innings of experience, it's pretty safe to say that Ponson or Ortiz will be anchoring the fourth or fifth starter position.  So, who would you rather have?

Durability

              2006        2004-2006
Name       IP   GS         IP    GS

Ortiz    190.2  33       490.0   77
Ponson    85.0  16       431.0   72

While the overall numbers over the last three years don't look drastically different, the fissure is wider than it appears.  Ponson's 72 starts indicate at least some instability in his consistency, and it has to do with his health and overall ineffective performance.  Ortiz actually split time between the bullpen and rotation in 2004, making 20 appearances as a relief pitcher.  In this sense, Ortiz's moderate advantage over Ponson is decieving.

Let's be clear, though:  just because Ortiz made more appearances doesn't necessarily mean he was more effective.  As a starting pitcher his entire career, which includes being a big piece of the Angels' World Series run of 2002, Anaheim didn't move him from starter to reliever because he was blowing hitters away.

So...pick your poison.  Either way, it's difficult to pick who has the advantage here because results were the same:  your starting pitcher has a history, a recent history, of being ineffective regardless of how many innings they pitched or games they started.

Strikeouts

              2006         Career
Name           K/9         K/9

Ortiz         4.91         5.66
Ponson        4.33         5.41

If you only strike out 25 people in a season, it's not a big deal...unless you pitched 25 innings.  Neither of these guys, no matter how many innings they pitched, really managed to perform a disappearing act with a baseball.  Their strikeout rates from last season are disturbingly low, and their career numbers are decidely average and unimpressive.

But you don't have to be a Santana or a Liriano to be effective...or average.  Sidney Ponson hangs his hat of mediocrity on being a groundball pitcher.  Ponson's GO:AO ratio dropped below 1.00 only once--in his 2006 stint with the Yankees.  Ortiz's career ratio of the same statistic is 1.07, thanks in large part to numbers below 1.00 in '03, '04 and '06.

Neither pitcher can rely on a strikeout to retire a hitter.  Glancing through their numbers will indicate there aren't other numbers that translate to success on the field in regards to these two pitchers, either.  So how did Ramon Ortiz go 15-9 with a 3.77 ERA in 2002?  How did Sidney Ponson manage 17 wins and a 3.75 ERA in 2003?

All I'm coming up with is luck.

Allowing Base Runners

               2006               Career
Name      H/9  BB/9  WHIP     H/9  BB/9  WHIP

Ortiz   10.86  3.02  1.54    9.61  3.02  1.42
Ponson  10.75  3.80  1.62   10.02  3.06  1.45

It's not the walks that were necessarily killing Ponson and Ortiz.  It's that both of them are walking two or three hitters per start while averaging more than a hit per inning.  When you average 1.5 baserunners per inning, you're going to get shelled.  When you're not getting shelled, you're just getting lucky.  If a pitcher manages to last six innings allowing nine base runners, and logs a quality start, what else would you call it?

If you're noticing a pattern developing--the fact that the numbers for these guys were worse in 2006 than they have been for their career--you're right.  Unfortunately, the career numbers aren't quite the light at the end of the tunnel.  In fact, taking note of how each of these pitchers have performed the last few years, there's little reason to expect they could manage the magic they managed to conjure for one season each.

There is a bright side here.  Thankfully, neither of these guys are going to be counted on to be win machines.  Their job is to log innings, and to give stability to an inexperienced rotation.

Mmm...warm fuzzies.

Contracts

Name        Specifics
Ortiz       1-Year, $3.1 MM
Ponson      1-Year, Minor League Contract ($1.0 MM for making 25-man roster)

In all three prior comparisons, Ramon Ortiz managed a slight advantage over Ponson.  Here is where those margins disappear, not only because Ponson's contract is 1/3 of Ramon's, but also because he'll only make that one million if he makes the roster.

Obviously, you pay for better players.  Ramon Ortiz, even if just barely, IS better than Sidney Ponson historically.  Just for relative purposes, however, let's look at one more line of statistics, and then you can pass judgement on your own.

Name          PRAA '04-'06
Ortiz             -37
Ponson            -54

This is Pitchers Runs Above Average, a defense-independent statistic.  Is being less effective than an average pitcher, but more effective than another who's even worse, worth $2,000,000?

In this season's free agent market, and considering the Twins' needs, the answer might actually be "yes".

0 recs  |  Comment 5 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

One key thing...
...that I see that's not here is their groundball tendancies.  Ponson, historically, has been a pretty decent GB pitcher.  The last three years, he's been around a 50% GB%, which is essentially where Carlos Silva was when he was pitching well in '04 and '05.  If Rick Anderson can get Ponson to throw a few more strikes and cut down on the walks, then I can see Ponson being above replacement level, and maybe even pretty close to average.  (Incidentally, the high GB% and problem with walks is similar to what Reyes was coming into camp last year, though Reyes had a much higher K rate.)

Ortiz is a groundball neutral pitcher, though, around 40% GB%.  You generally have to be able to get groundballs OR miss bats to be successful, and Ortiz hasn't been good at either.

Ortiz just sucks.  This was a depressing signing.

by ubelmann on Jan 20, 2007 4:40 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

Actually...
I did briefly mention the groundball thing for Ponson, under the strikeout section...;)

But you're definitely right.  If he can get back to being the big-time groundball guy he was, it'll go a long way toward making him better than he's been recently.

by Jesse on Jan 20, 2007 11:34 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

So you did...
I think its importance should really be emphasized, though.  If I was going to designate the three most important things in pitching, it'd be missing bats, throwing strikes, and inducing ground balls.

And GO/AO is really the wrong way to measure how much of a grounball pitcher someone is.  Leaving out hits isn't a good idea, and just like PA is the appropriate denominator for OBP, the number of balls in play is the appropriate denominator for how often a pitcher induces a ground ball.

by ubelmann on Jan 20, 2007 2:31 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I'm
Unless Rick Anderson sees a specific mechanical flaw he feels he can correct to fiz up Ortiz, I'm very very angry about this signing.  I'd actually feel better about this team if they just burned the 3 million instead of spending it on Ortiz.  Add in the fact it hurts your ability to offer other guys long term deals...

TR still fails at signing free agents to actual contracts.

"Baseball is great because you can't take a knee or kill the clock. You have to put the ball over the plate and give the other guy his damn chance." C Stengel

by AdamOnFirst on Jan 20, 2007 3:55 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Ortiz
Not much good to say, except I did sort of like him 5-6 years ago when he was with the Angels (before his age scandal added three years to him).  I am not 100% sure he'll suck like I was last year with Batista.  I'm putting it at about 85%.

Sad to lose Romero.

You can't dust for vomit.

by twinstalker on Jan 23, 2007 3:54 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

TT is an SB Nation blog of, by and for the fans. We strive to be the best Minnesota Twins blog by providing quality content and analysis, as well as daily news and notes on the team. We hope you'll make Twinkie Town your home for all things Twins!
Start posting about the Twins »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Small
Organization Review (Relief Pitchers)
Small
On Roy, Ramos, and RISK

Recent FanPosts

Small
Josh Johnson
Small
Anybody want to talk revenues?
Joel87bw5_small
Signing up for the Minors
Small
Roy, Ramos, and RISK, Part II
Small
30 Cents on the Dollar = 2B Indifference
P1060527_small
New Uni Thoughts
Small
Minor League Report...November 14, 2009
Pose_small
Prediction Time (My Guess at 2010 Organizational teams)

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

Twinkie Town On Twitter

SPONSORS


Editor-In-Chief

Twinkietown_small Jesse

Senior Writer

Hrbek_small Jon Marthaler

The_jet_small cmathewson

Gladdentwins_small Adam Peterson

Hosken_powell_autograph_small RandBall's Stu