Who Would You Rather Have: Jason Bay or...?

by Randy Booth on Nov 19, 2009 6:00 AM EST in News Comment 20 comments

Boston Red Sox left fielder Jason Bay speaks to the media while his daughter Addison shields her eye from the bright lights at Fenway Park Boston, Saturday, Oct. 10, 2009. The Red Sox host the Los Angeles Angels in Game 3 of the American League division baseball series on Sunday. (AP Photo/Charles Krupa)

4 months ago: Boston Red Sox left fielder Jason Bay speaks to the media while his daughter Addison shields her eye from the bright lights at Fenway Park Boston, Saturday, Oct. 10, 2009. The Red Sox host the Los Angeles Angels in Game 3 of the American League division baseball series on Sunday. (AP Photo/Charles Krupa)

Browse more photos »

Jason Bay is a good baseball player ... at some things. For other things, he's a bad baseball player. But that's true for a lot of baseball players. There aren't many players who are great at everything.

We have an idea of what Bay's strengths and weaknesses are, but what's more important for the future of the Red Sox?

Let's look at the negatives first. In bullet point form, of course:

Defense.
Defense.
Defense.

I know -- it's harsh -- but we all know it's true. Sure, he committed zero errors. Which is absolutely fantastic ... if you are watching baseball from the 1980s. Instead, his UZR/150 was -11.2 (which was actually much better than his -24 in 49 games with the Sox in 2008).

His -11.2 was second worst in the MLB for left fielders only in front of Ryan Braun. So it's really simple to say he was one of the worst -- potentially the worst. This is something Theo Epstein knows and it will be huge when it comes down to figuring out a contract.

(With all this fielding stuff, let me mention he wasn't even the worst Red Sox outfielder defensively according to UZR/150. Jacoby Ellsbury takes that honor with his impressive -18.3 -- third worst in the MLB. Hooray for Vernon Wells' impressive dropoff in production!)

But we've killed fielding into the ground. It's dead. We know about Bay's inefficiencies. Now let's talk about what he does right.

Bay's OPS of .921 was second best in the American League for qualified left fielders (Adam Lind was No. 1) and his .384 was second. His BB% of 15 was second in the major leagues ... and so was his K% (30.5). He also had the second most home runs for left fielders in the MLB (the last three stats, he trailed only Adam Dunn. Boy, they're just a little similar, huh?)

So what's more important: Bay's great offense or Bay's poor defense?

Let's put it this way. Who would you rather play left field for the Boston Red Sox, Jason Bay or Nyjer Morgan?

Morgan was arguably the best defensive left fielder in baseball last season, but his bat isn't anything to write home about. Here's his full line:

	G	AB	R	H	2B	3B	HR	RBI	BB	K	SB	CS	AVG	OBP	SLG
2009 - Nyjer Morgan	49	191	35	67	9	2	1	12	11	25	24	7	.351	.396	.435

(NOTE: Those are Morgan's stats from his time with Washington, not with Pittsburgh too. He batted .277 with the Pirates.)

I'm sure a lot of you look at those stats and go, "Yes! I'd much rather have Morgan if his defense is true." But really, you're looking at another player like Ellsbury -- except better defensive.

Admit it, you'd miss the power bat in the middle of the lineup. Defense wins games, but without offense, you'll never win games. A player might go to bat five times in a game, but never have a ball hit to them in the field in the same game. So where do you want your player to be better?

Perhaps it's not a fair argument, because I know a lot of you will say: "Screw Morgan. Give me Holliday." Sure, and I get that argument, but I think it comes down to give and take. Which would you rather have: nine great defenders who can't hit, or nine great hitters who can't field.

That's what we're struggling with Bay.

0 recs | Comment 20 comments | Share

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

I'd rather have a stop gap in LF and have the $$ Bay or Holliday will require

free for next winter. I see 2010 being rough for the Sox short of a miracle. The hope being Lowell and Ortiz can produce at a high level in contract years.

Hey Tek...Screw you
Brandon Webb in 2010
Jason Bay is not WERTH it

by gizmosandy on Nov 19, 2009 7:25 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Don't forget the Canadian Sox Fans!

The Red Sox have a large fanbase (I think) in the Canadian regions slightly northwest of Maine, north of Maine, and in the Canadian provinces northest of Maine. Signing Bay will keep them happier and more loyal, and if the Sox don’t improve this team drastically, they will need that kind of blinded loyalty to keep little Fenway full!?

by NG on Nov 19, 2009 8:52 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

The "Canadian regions" slightly northwest of Maine...

…would be Quebec. It’s a Canadian province, whether they like it or not. I don’t think I’ve ever seen a Frenchman in a Sox hat. There are bound to be some, but I wouldn’t say there is a large fanbase.

North and northeast of Maine would be the Atlantic Provinces: New Brunswick, Nova Scotia (where I was born, raised, and currently reside), Prince Edward Island, and Newfoundland. The fanbase in NB and NS would be significantly larger. When I was growing up, we got the Bangor stations on the ol’ boob-tube. But, currently, it’s all more-or-less Canadian feeds, so the younger generation would have even more access Jays talk, far less from south of the border.

For the record, I am a VERY proud Canadian…and I want Holliday.

Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.

by Bloggy on Nov 19, 2009 11:49 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I don't know how much I trust defensive metrics

As much as I’d like to be able to, baseball just can’t be boiled down to objective statistics (yet). Jerry Crasnick explains:

The eye test, however, tends to complicate matters. Several baseball executives told ESPN.com that they consider both Bay and Holliday below-average defenders, and one American League GM described Holliday as “brutal” with a glove. A National League assistant said his team’s internal defensive metrics rank Holliday as superior to Bay, but that the team’s scouts actually prefer Bay to Holliday.

Am I about to say Bay is a better fielder than Holliday? Absolutely not. But they might be closer than people are suggesting, and in that case, I’ll take Bay’s offensive production.

by LegendaryTadpole on Nov 19, 2009 1:02 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Defensive Metrics aren't perfect

And no one should pretend like they are. What things like UZR can show, however, are trends in defensive production. If Bay has been below average to poor defensively for the majority of his career, it’s probably a safe bet that he’ll continue to be poor defensively. Not to mention a player’s defense usually declines as he ages, and there are questions (well, to me anyway) as to how long Bay should really even stay in the field. My eye test tells me Holliday is a better defender than Bay (the NLDS nuts catch notwithstanding) and the defensive metrics back me up on this, so I’d be confident going forward with Holliday over Bay defensively any day of the week.

And let’s not pretend like Bay hit that well throughout the entire year. He started off extremely hot, and hit much better than his career numbers would indicate, and then he slumped badly for a while before getting better again as the summer ended. Looking at his year as a whole the numbers look good, but all in all it was a pretty uneven year.

DFA Beckett

by South Coast Ghost on Nov 19, 2009 1:11 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

By every available advanced metric, Holliday is the better defender.

Don’t believe me. Here’s a Baseball Prospectus comparison of the two players.

Now, let’s look at them offensively. By wOBA, they’re very similar:

Bay – .397 wOBA (2009) .384 wOBA (career)
Holliday – .390 wOBA (2009) .400 wOBA (career)

Bay walks a bit more, but also strikes out a lot more:

Bay – 15% BB (2009) 12.9 % BB (career)/30.5% K (2009) 27.0% (career)
Holliday – 11% BB (2009) 9.1% BB (career)/17.4% K (2009) 18.7% K (Career)

Bay is a bit more disciplined (O-swings), but Holliday makes better contact with pitches in the strike zone (Z-contact).

Bay – 20.4% O-swing (2009) 19.4% O-swing (career)/79.8% Z-contact (2009) 81.1% Z-contact (career)
Holliday – 24.9% O-swing (2009) 25.1% O-swing (career)/88.1% Z-contact (2009) 85% Z-contact (career)

One question the Sox will have to take into consideration is whether or not Bay’s drop in Z-contact is a sign that his bat is slowing down. Holliday is less of a one-dimensional player than Bay. Most defensive metrics see him as the superior defensive player, and Bay isn’t the better hitter. Both players are very close offensively.

I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.

by Drugs Delaney on Nov 19, 2009 2:20 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Don't give me that.

Come on. Holliday’s career wOBA, which has certainly been aided by Coors Field(!) and NL pitching? Heck no. This is the AL East. Bay has proven he can perform here. Might Holliday end up being a better offensive player if the Sox give him a chance? Sure, but I’d rather take proven production. There are all sorts of metrics on FanGraphs that I can cherry pick like you did and make it seem like Bay’s ten times better than Holliday, but that won’t get us anywhere. This is a subjective debate, and I just trust Bay more.

As for defensive metrics, the point of my post is that I don’t trust them. Sorry, I know to such a super sabermetrician, that sounds like blasphemy, but read the article I linked to. If UZR says somebody’s a terrific fielder, but GMs everywhere are saying he’s not, the truth probably lies somewhere in the middle.

by LegendaryTadpole on Nov 19, 2009 4:02 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

But

you are really missing the point.

a)As for offense, Holliday’s numbers in his limited time in the AL were good. He OPS+ed 70, 134, 123 and 206 in April, May, June and July in the AL in a tough pitchers park, run prevention division and a crappy lineup. Sure, he sucked in April, but toss that out and he was better than Bay. Also, look at his home-road splits by the last full year he played in the NL. His road splits became quite good.
b)You forget that Bay and Drew and Lowell all came from the NL-and they have been just as good in the AL East.
c)As for defense it is true that these metrics are not perfect. But when you look at the aggregate, they tell a rather consistent story. In fact the article that Drugs links to shows that the year to year fluctuations are much smaller in these averages. And they all say the same thing:Holliday is a decent fielder and Bay is a horrible fielder. GMs may say Holliday is a bad fielder because he is stiff-but he runs better and is more agressive in the outfield. Basically GMs are looking at something that is not really important-you don’t have to be fluid to convert balls in play into outs-you need to get good jumps, position your self well and run well.

You can’t argue that Bay is close to as valuable as Holliday. He is older, is a far worse defensive player, and is probably more of a risk to decline faster(probably). His offense, despite the belief about “proven in the AL East” is not really better. The only argument to be made for Bay is that he might come cheaper and easier to the Sox.

by Buzzy on Nov 19, 2009 4:28 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Plus, it's pretty easy to find a park-adjusted wOBA

The formula, IIRC, is wOBA times the square root of (1/park factor).

Holliday’s was .404 this year, .410 last year; Bay’s was .403 this year, .403 last year. Not much difference, was there?

by RSNexile on Nov 19, 2009 4:46 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

In fact, here are their figures side-by-side for the last several years:

2004 — Bay .393, Holliday .367
2005 — Bay .425, Holliday .379
2006 — Bay .410, Holliday .417
2007 — Bay .343, Holliday .426
2008 — Bay .403, Holliday .410
2009 — Bay .403, Holliday .404

So there’s virtually no difference between them the last two years, but Holliday’s numbers are a little better overall. Add to that that he’s younger and a better defensive player (if still really not good) and I’m convinced he’s the better choice if money is not a factor.

In fairness, though, I don’t see him playing well enough to deserve the kind of monster contract he’s going to get. Then again, neither will Bay, and it’s a huge drop off from either one to Hermida if that’s what we’re stuck with.

by RSNexile on Nov 19, 2009 4:53 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Do you think Holliday

will command that much more than Bay? Bay turned down 4 years, $60 million—these contracts will be huge regardless of who we sign. I think you guys have convinced me Holliday’s better, and if the Sox are gonna compete, they need a bat. Whether that comes with an Adrian Gonzalez trade or a Holliday/Bay signing, it’ll be expensive.

by LegendaryTadpole on Nov 19, 2009 5:39 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Holliday

will command much more. In part because most GMs are wise to the defensive difference, and mostly because of his agent.

by Buzzy on Nov 19, 2009 6:32 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

a) I’ll give you that.
b) I most certainly won’t give you that. That’s a bogus argument. You know who else came from the NL? John Smoltz and Brad Penny. Just because some players do well doesn’t mean others won’t.
c) That’s a much more persuasive argument than Drugs offered. You might have made me a believer.

by LegendaryTadpole on Nov 19, 2009 5:34 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

And by “others won’t,” I mean “others will.”

by LegendaryTadpole on Nov 19, 2009 5:40 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Pitchers

have a much harder time switching leagues than hitters do. In particular they face another pitcher and do not face the DH, who in addtition to not being a pitcher is actually better hitting on average than most position players. Furthermore there are more pitchers parks in the NL. I bet you can’t find too many big time hitters who went from the NL to AL and really had night and day struggles (give Burrell another year to see). Many (Cabrera, Teixiera, Sheffield, Abreu, Drew…) are really pretty much the same especially when you adjust for park, etc. There is a pitching quality difference between the leagues but it does not seem to translate into too much of a difference.

by Buzzy on Nov 19, 2009 6:31 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs