BP Comment Quick Links
![]() | |
February 11, 2010 Team Health ReportsPhiladelphia Phillies
The Summary: The Phillies are coming off two straight World Series appearances and seem set up well to go for three, four, or even five with the team they have built. No small part of that is due to the team that's keeping that team together. Scott Sheridan and his staff not only got to go to the World Series, they collected a trophy of their own last year, taking home the Dick Martin Award for Best Medical Staff. I got to present the award to them at their affiliates banquet at the winter meetings in December in Indianapolis, where Sheridan and the rest of the team were humble about their success. They credited their great stats and on-field success to hard work, a focus on prevention and personalized care, and an organizational commitment. The whole gang is back this year, so there's no reason to believe that anything will change from that standpoint. That's more of a big deal than you think, with many former DMA assistants moving on to head up their own staffs. The talent behind the scenes is nearly as impressive as what they have on the field. What you're seeing is a holistic success story, one that very few teams can compete with.
The Facts The Cost: The Phillies lost $11.5 million to injuries last season and have lost $41.1 million over the last three years. That is money they could have spent to retain the services of Cliff Lee and formed, with their front three starters, one of the top rotations in the NL, or maybe even the entire league. It's also enough money to upgrade the shaky back end of the bullpen, where money was used on Danys Baez when it could have gone towards a proven commodity like Jose Valverde, or even a guy with a higher upside than Baez, like Fernando Rodney (though Rodney could have added to their injury totals himself). If you want to look at the market for third basemen, the Phillies could have easily brought in Adrian Beltre to fill the void instead of trying to convert Placido Polanco to the position. The Big Risk: For a team without much risk at all, it's hard to find "the big risk." It would be a cop out to say Jamie Moyer, given his age and the problems of his offseason. The real risk for me is actually one of the greens. While the team could replace almost any player on the team (usually with Jayson Werth, so perhaps the biggest risk is not being able to re-sign him), it couldn't deal with a significant injury to Chase Utley. After coming back in what seemed like record time from his hip surgery, Utley showed no sign of trouble from his first day back. Stories leaked from the clubhouse that just as Utley hid the pain before the surgery, he was keeping the poker face on early in the season, too. Most teams couldn't handle losing their star, so this isn't much of a reach, but Utley's ability to play through injuries makes him even more valuable. The Comeback: In 2008, Brad Lidge was as good as it gets at his position. In 2009, Brad Lidge was about as bad as it gets, though he wasn't enough of an anchor to drag the team down. Knowing that Lidge was pitching much of the season with pain in his elbow-though there's debate as to exactly when the flexor tendon tore-explains some of it. We also know that pitchers do tend to come back from this type of injury. Lidge had surgery just after the World Series and is expected to be ready for spring training, though he's never really seemed to need it anyway. The Phillies managed Lidge's situation last year by simply letting him pitch through it as much as possible. There's no reason to think that will change, but for now, there's a chance to think that Lidge's results could change for the positive. The Trend: It's hard being No. 1. There's no place to go but down. While it's unlikely that the Phillies will have the luck necessary to repeat-no team has done it yet with the DMA-it is quite possible for them to be healthy enough to expect a third year of playoff baseball in Philly. The team has been in the top 10 throughout Sheridan's tenure, so while I'd expect them to slide back a little bit, they seem to be competing with the White Sox and Brewers for the five-year ranking winner. The Ratings
|
That "The Cost" section is getting pretty repetitive. "If the so-and-sos had no injuries they could've solved such-and-such problem by being able to afford Joe Shlabotnik". Soapboxes shift from boring to annoying when the next day's message is always so similar.
It seems especially out of place since the rest of the article mentions how great Philly is at keeping their players healthy. It's interesting to consider the cost of medical care - I hadn't really considered it before - but the way it's presented makes it seem like no team is doing a good enough job!
Yes, it is repetitive but that does not make it untrue. If teams would stop investing in players with a history of injury or ones that are more likely to get hurt, they could afford to patch holes and improve themselves. It is insightful and shows the true value of a solid medical staff along with a front office that is not willing to throw money at Raul Ibanez or any other player who is likely to decline quickly and spend significant time on the DL.
Keep up the good work Will
Yes, but DL trips are unavoidable, even if you are doing everything right. I don't know how much money teams comparable to the Phillies lost as a result of the DL, but I think it would be hard to field a contending team and be able to consistently lose less than $5-10 mil a year as a result of the DL. To imply that the Phillies could have avoided spending that money seems a little silly, though I do enjoy the Adrian Beltre comment! "If only we had healthier players... we could have afforded a third baseman who doesn't wear a cup!"
This was the question that first came to mind as I read this (working backwards and having just read the THR for the Mets).
It's a given that all teams will have injuries, and will thus lose money (Dollars lost and/or Injury cost) to them.
My question is, what's a reasonable scale to compare these values, both to other teams, and to what an "excellent" team might expect to lose compared to a "poor" one?
The difference between say, a baseline for "excellent" and "poor" and the actual cost of a team's injuries would do a lot to put things in perspective.
Yeah, the Phillies totally don't know what they're doing. What a miserable franchise--what have they done recently? Ibanez was worth 19 million last year according to Fangraphs, so "throwing that money at him" last year really looks like a terrible investment. Given that those wins he added came during a season in which they went to the WS (giving them added value), he could pretty much be replacement-level for the next two years, and his contract would still be a reasonable investment.
Also, as someone else pointed out, it's impossible to not lose some money to the DL. So the issue isn't "11 million dollars lost"--you have to look at the margin of what a team who invested in the healthiest players possible would still lose. Given that Will notes the Phils are the best team in baseball at keeping guys healthy, that marginal value lost has to be pretty small.
Perhaps this section of the text could be interpreted based on $$$ lost to injury over something like- the average team, some "replacement level" injury level, etc. (kinda like a team of replacemenet players would win 40 wins and we base marginal wins from that)