Preseason All-AL East
by JoCro on Feb 14, 2010 4:20 PM EST
Email
PrintI am shamelessly stealing this idea from Royals Review, where they did it for the Central. I used http://www.mlbdepthcharts.com/ and Fangraphs to figure everything out. The position is given along with the projected starters on each team, and the winner at that position, the player with the highest projected WAR (CHONE).
Left Field – Randy Winn, Jacoby Ellsbury, Noland Reimold, Travis Snider, Carl Crawford.
Jacoby wins with 3.9 WAR
Center Field – Curtis Granderson, Mike Cameron, Adam Jones, Vernon Wells, B.J. Upton
Granderson wins with 4.4 WAR (CHONE puts Cameron at 1.7 even though he had two straight 4+ years, seemed very odd to me)
Right Field – Nick Swisher, J.D. Drew, Nick Markakis, Jose Bautista, Matt Joyce
Markakis wins with 4.1 WAR (CHONE puts Drew at 2.7 despite two straight 4+ years, another oddity)
Third Base – Alex Rodriguez, Adrian Beltre, Miguel Tejada, Edwin Encarnacion, Evan Longoria
Longoria just gets it with 5.1 WAR (Rodriguez was at 5.0)
Shortstop – Derek Jeter, Marco Scutaro, Cesar Izturis, Alex Gonzalez, Jason Bartlett
Jeter wins with 3.4 WAR
Second Base – Robinson Cano, Dustin Pedroia, Brian Roberts, Aaron Hill, Ben Zobrist
Pedroia wins with 4.7 WAR (Zobrist had a fairly conservative 3.7 after his breakout)
First Base – Mark Teixiera, Kevin Youkilis, Garret Atkins, Lyle Overbay, Carlos Pena
Teixiera wins with 5.1 WAR (Youkilis posted consecutive seasons of 5.5 and 5.6, but CHONE has him at just 3.8)
Catcher – Jorge Posada, Victor Martinez, Matt Weiters, John Buck, Kelly Shoppach
Martinez takes the last spot with 4.4 WAR
It all adds up to a 35.1 WAR for the All-AL East team.
95 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
CHONE has some joke-looking projections this year. These are going to look fairly biased, but...
Catcher: Victor Martinez
-Playing time and age make me put Martinez over Posada. Wieters still needs to break out to prove he’s better than the 2 obvious favorites.
1st Base: Kevin Youkilis
-Teixeira had defensive issues last year, otherwise I’d give it to him for how long he’s had his offense. But in the last 2 years, they’ve been pretty even with the bat.
2nd Base: Dustin Pedroia
-OK, so this is starting to look biased. But you can’t argue with Pedroia’s defense, which is far and away the best amongst proven AL East 2nd basemen. He also brings on-base skills that only Cano even approaches. Now, if Zobrist can match his 2009 with his 2010, then he’s going to jump to first. But he’s got to repeat it to get credit for it.
Shortstop: Derek Jeter
-The guy actually had a good defensive season to go with his usual offensive dominance of the position. No real competition here.
3rd Base: Evan Longoria
-Alex Rodriguez having his worst year in a while defensively post-surgery isn’t surprising, but I’m still gonna need to see the comeback before I put him over Longo, who (sadly) will only be getting better.
Left Field: Carl Crawford
-Ellsbury is gonna be great for a left fielder defensively, but he’d be hard pressed to do much better than Crawford, much less well enough to offset Crawford’s power.
Center Field: Mike Cameron
-Cameron’s worst year in recent memory is about as good as Granderson’s best year in recent memory.
Right Field: J.D. Drew
-Drew’s 2007 is looking like a harmless blip on a very good player’s carer. Markakis’ 2008 is looking like a superstar blip on a very good player’s career. But Drew had the better 2009, so I’ll give it to him.
So, yeah, I gave the Sox 6/9 positions. But it’s closer than that, I’d say. There’s virtual ties at 1st, catcher, and right field, really, so you could easily bring them down to 3 and the Yankees up to 4.
USG
And second base is also dependant on Zobrist not repeating.
But what I do take away from this is how there’s no more black holes.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Feb 14, 2010 9:20 PM EST up reply actions
I've been very confused as I look at some of the projections
What exactly does CHONE base the projections on? I thought some players (Drew, Cameron, Youk and Zobrist most notably) displayed very conservative projections despite good seasons. How far back does it look?
I can't find their method anywhere.
Even in 2007, Youk had a WAR equal to his projection, so they’re clearly not really weighting it much towards recent results unless they’re assuming some big age regression for Youk. That, or they pull everyone towards replacement level naturally. Cameron’s hit is likely entirely age related, but that doesn’t explain why Drew is supposed to have another 2007 despite it being the outlier in the last 4 seasons.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Feb 15, 2010 10:52 AM EST up reply actions
Tex had defensive issues at first last year?
News to me. I don’t think that’s an accurate assessment.
Strikeouts are boring- Besides that, they're fascist. Throw some ground balls - it's more democratic.
by CasanovaWong on Feb 15, 2010 12:37 PM EST up reply actions
He showed up pretty poorly by UZR
-4.1
Ive never been a fan of UZR for evaluating 1B defense… but it does roughly do the job well. The guys who are considered the best 1B are typically at the top and the worst are typically at the bottom.
I consider Teixeira around average defensively over there. He’s certainly not an elite defender, as many seem to believe, but that UZR number doesnt accurately reflect his abilities or performance, either. He’s pretty good… and he looks like Keith Hernandez compared to what NY has been running out over there since Tino Martinez left.
Bill James had him as perfectly average (a 0) as compared to a +23 in '08.
Tex is a good defender who can have great and average years. This was one of his average ones.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Feb 15, 2010 2:16 PM EST up reply actions
UZR and 1st base
I don’t think it’s reliable at all, simply because it wouldn’t take account for where the fielder is set up. If he’s holding a guy on, he can’t get to the ball in the hole, but he’ll easily get the ball down the line. So it seems to be as much chance as anything else.
Manny ain't the only bad man.
Chance has a tendency to even out over large sample sizes.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Feb 15, 2010 10:38 PM EST up reply actions
And in re UZR, the relevant sample is greater than one season.
But even taking into account a large sample, UZR still has very little predictive value for a first baseman, where depending on the situation he will be ten feet in one direction or another.
Manny ain't the only bad man.
Well...
I think he’s saying: is there any reason to think certain 1B are especially helped or hurt by that effect?
My gripe with it is that range at 1B is what UZR measures and that doesnt tell the whole story.
If anything
A 1b with great pitching, like Texiara might be helped if there is any effect because he has less runners to hold on. Though I don’t buy that it really makes a difference.
by BigRedDog42 on Feb 16, 2010 12:53 AM EST up reply actions
I agree that range doesn't tell the whole story.
Being able to pick balls in the dirt and/or make acrobatic tags is at least as big part of the 1B game as making diving stops.
But in re “is there any reason to think certain 1B are especially helped or hurt by that effect?” – obviously I don’t have the data. But the system is flawed for 1B. It arbitrarily punishes a 1B holding a guy on if he can’t make the play in the hole, and similarly rewards the guy holding someone on for making the play down the line. And this isn’t a chance occurrence that would equalize over time – like the proverbial “sun in the eyes” type scenario for an outfielder – but rather a fixed part of the 1B’s game.
Manny ain't the only bad man.
It arbitrarily punishes a 1B holding a guy on if he can’t make the play in the hole, and similarly rewards the guy holding someone on for making the play down the line. And this isn’t a chance occurrence that would equalize over time – like the proverbial "sun in the eyes" type scenario for an outfielder – but rather a fixed part of the 1B’s game.
This is what Im talking about. Just like how positioning is not actually accounted for in UZR, is there any reason to think some 1B cover 1st base more often than other to such a degree that it hurts them in UZR? Im not sure there is. Im sure some cover 1B more than others… not sure the difference is huge, though. On top of that, Im really not at all clear if that effects the BIP data enough to account for the difference in UZR…
But the point is that it effects all 1B.
So it’s equal.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Feb 16, 2010 7:43 PM EST up reply actions
It's not "equal"
it’s arbitrary. “Equally arbitrary,” perhaps, but some guys are going to get punished more than others in any given year, just out of chance.
Manny ain't the only bad man.
Then we take multi-year samples for UZR.
Youk is a +16.8 UZR at first in the last three years (despite playing a bunch at 3rd)
Teix is dead even.
Unless you’d argue that Youk doesn’t pick balls as well as Teix, or that around 3,700 innings at first isn’t enough to even the scales. Teix has only 1 above average year of range at first. Unless he’s ****ing set up a tent on the base, I’d say it’s evened out.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Feb 16, 2010 9:25 PM EST up reply actions
Sorry, he has 3.
But the other 2 came in his first two years.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Feb 16, 2010 9:29 PM EST up reply actions
There is no evening of the scales for 1B.
As I said above, this isn’t a chance occurrence or an outlier that equalizes over time. There is a fundamental difference between how a 1st basemen is positioned versus everybody else on the field. The other positions adjust to the hitter, not the runner. (2B and SS do it too, but much less frequently, and they divide the “repositioning” to the respective hitters’ weak side.)
And it has nothing to do with pitching a tent – when a 1B plays in his regular spot, he loses the ball hit down the line. Unless and until they take account of where a 1B is positioned, the UZR is arbitrary.
Manny ain't the only bad man.
You've got to be kidding me.
First: UZR does not take into account what players at other positions do. The points gained and lost from making play in zone A, B, or C are based around how often OTHER FIRST BASEMEN make the play.
Second: If a 1B plays in his regular spot, then he requires great range to get to a ball down the line. The same way as if a center fielder plays shallow and has to run down a deep fly ball.
Third: If a 1B is positioned for ball X and instead gets ball Y, that is luck. Luck which all first basemen will be victims or benefactors of at random, and luck which does, in fact, balance out over time. If a 1B plays on the bag and gets a ball hit down the line, then he gets credit for it based on how often other 1B turn that ball into an out. Given that this would be determined by a normal distribution of times the 1B is playing on the bag and off, this would provide, over a significant sample size, an accurate representation of the first baseman’s range.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Feb 17, 2010 12:20 AM EST up reply actions
First – that’s not what I was saying. I’m saying that the problem presented by the 1B’s positioning is unique to 1B.
Second – where the guy in the regular spot needs great range to get the ball down the line, the guy holding someone on only has to take a step to the right. The main difference between the CF and the 1B is that the CF more often than not repositions to the hitter, not the context – the exception being a man on third, late in a close game – and the 1B always repositions to the man on first, regardless of the hitter. Also, the 1B has a lot less time to react to unfortunate positioning than the CF.
Third – why does “luck” balance out over time? This isn’t a coin toss, where there are two true outcomes. Any individual 1B’s UZR depends not only on his individual chance, but on the spray chart for balls hit into the 1Bs’ zone across all of baseball in a particular year, the relative positioning of all 1Bs for all such hits in the zone, and the relative range of all 1Bs in that season. Any given 1B could have two identical defensive seasons, but given the variables beyond his control see his UZR fluctuate.
Manny ain't the only bad man.
It is a coin toss.
Maybe there’s a few more outcomes, but it’s certainly luck, and it certainly balances out.
You’re holding a runner. The ball is hit down the line.
You’re holding a runner. The ball is hit towards your original position.
You’re in your original position. The ball is hit down the line.
You’re in your original position. The ball is hit towards you.
You’re in either position, a ball is hit between the two positions.
Now, if we accept that balls hit down the line are always going to be gotten to by 1B who are holding the runner on, and never by 1B not holding the runner on, then we end up with X% chance of making the play, where X is the number of times that the ball is hit down the line while the runner is held on.
Do you really expect that over, say, 3500 innings, there will be many 1B who experience a significant variation on that X%? That some guy over 3500 innings just randomly ends up in the wrong place a lot more than other guys?
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Feb 17, 2010 1:34 AM EST up reply actions
Yes.
As for 3500 innings, how many actual UZR-relevant chances do you think a 1B gets in a full season? I can’t find it anywhere, but it’s not not that many. Eyeballing the Yanks stats he seems to have fielded the ball approximately 200 or 300 times. (Taking Tex’s total put-outs, subtracting assists from the the rest of the infielders and pitchers, and doing a little fuzzy math on the double plays.) I can’t find any site showing how many total chances – or balls within the 1B zone – he would’ve had.
The Yanks faced around 6000 hitters last season, and approximately 1300 of them in situations where Tex would have been holding someone on, or approximately 21% of the time. There is no way of knowing how many of Tex’s (unknown number of) chances came in the @ 21% of the time he would have been at first.
And you’re forgetting the most important aspect of the multi-season calculation – that the playing field around him changes every year, because the spray chart within the league-wide 1B zone will fluctuate, and the relative positioning of 1B throughout the league will vary at approximately the same rate as Tex.
There are simply too many variables for the stat to be a valid measurement of fielding prowess. It’s “reliable” in that it shows how many balls he actually got to as compared to the average 1B, but it takes no account as to where he was positioned relative the relative 1B.
The larger sample size works for a coin toss because it is symmetrical, thus you will eventually approach 50/50. But here it’s like you are flipping a coin for multiple seasons, only in one season the coin is weighted towards heads, the next towards tails, the next more towards heads, so forth, so on. And this assymetry isn’t some small outlier that gets corrected over time, it’s a completely random variation built into the model.
Manny ain't the only bad man.
It's NOT weighted towards heads, though, it only SEEMS like it is when you happen to flip heads 7 times out of 10 in one sequence.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Feb 17, 2010 8:58 PM EST up reply actions
No.
UZR “represents the value of a fielder’s performance expressed as runs saved or cost, in comparison to an average fielder (actually in comparison to the mean performance of all fielders) at that position, in that player’s league, and during that particular year.”
Thus, if a hypothetical 1B had an identical season, two years in a row – meaning same positioning, same spray, same dives, same everything – identical – his UZR would change from one year to the next because of the variation in league-wide spray, league wide-positioning, chance, etc.
That’s asymmetry, and that’s where the analogy to the weighted coins comes in. Some years it will be weighted one way, other years another. The individual’s variation – which itself will be significant from a year-to-year basis – is then measured against that back-drop.
This asymmetry effects all fielders, to a degree, but 1B more than any other because (1) they get the fewest chances of all players on the diamond, (2) 20% of the time they are adjusting their positioning not to the hitter but to the runner, making their positioning arbitrary, and (3) they have the most variable positioning relative to their reaction time – i.e., the CF who shades ten feet to the left is much more likely to make up for it than the 1B who is ten feet to his left.
In the AL, there are roughly 4,500 balls fielded by 1B in a given season (again, b/c I can’t find that data anywhere, this is a complete estimation, just multiplying my Tex estimate from earlier by 14, but this number is irrelevant), and some 20,000 at bats in which the first baseman is holding someone on, out of 90,000 overall. The chances that those 4500 balls are fielded in the 20-odd% of the time 1B’s are covering the runner is completely arbitrary and too variable to normalize over a single-season. Perhaps if UZR was using multiple seasons to establish the zone, it’d be less variable, but it doesn’t.
Manny ain't the only bad man.
So you're saying that in 1 year
Alright, I’m willing to concede that. I think for a player to be effected by it for more than a season or two would require a great deal of bad luck, still, but I can see how it would happen, and that it will cause some fluctuation in every year.
If you want a more perfect system, though, there’s always +/-, which involves video review of every play and, I quote:
First Base – There is a big difference between how a first baseman positions himself, depending on whether he’s holding the runner or not. To approximate this, we break down all plays involving first basemen into two categories, Holding Required and Holding Not Required. Holding Required is any situation where there’s a man on first with second base open. We may refine this in the future, but we found that since the outcomes are very different with runners being held this adjustment made an important difference in improving the accuracy of the first base plus/minus numbers.
So there you have it. For what it’s worth, +/- also tends to agree on Teixeira: Fantastic 2008, but an outlier, with 2009 representing a return to his average numbers hovering around 0
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Feb 17, 2010 10:59 PM EST up reply actions
Ignore the subject line there.
Changed the post.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Feb 17, 2010 10:59 PM EST up reply actions
+/-
is the Fielding Bible/John Dewan system. Its available (subscription) on billjames.com
The very important thing to remember with +/- vs. UZR is that UZR is used in terms of RUNS, while +/- talks in terms of PLAYS.
SO...
to be clear, if a player was +10 on both systems that would mean they are actually vastly disagreeing on his defensive abilities. They are just both expressed in terms of +x or -x.
Bill James also has a runs saved statistic derived from +/-
Along with a few other position-specific things. It still doesn’t include picking balls out of the dirt/air, and I have some issues with its attempts to credit both pitchers and catchers with SB saves without (I believe) cross referencing, as it were. Also with crediting catchers too much with pitchers’ ERAs. But that’s such sketchy territory that I can hardly blame them for trying.
Anyways, just to back up the Teix/Youk question
Teixeira runs saved
2005: 12
2006: 1
2007: -3
2008: 17
2009: 0
Youkilis runs saved
2005: 0 (41 innings)
2006: 7
2007: 7
2008: 4
2009: 10
Considering that Youkilis has saved 1 more run in 3000 less innings (3500 vs. 6500), I’d say he’s got the edge. I reiterate that both are fantastic at digging balls out of the dirt and picking them out of the air, but I think Youk is probably a top-2 or 3 first baseman if you account for innings played, behind only Pujols (the man is the complete package, seriously) and maybe Kotchman.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Feb 18, 2010 12:05 AM EST up reply actions
Pujols, for the ridiculous record, has saved...
6
7
18
27
15
and 10 runs in his career.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Feb 18, 2010 12:06 AM EST up reply actions
Another issue I have with UZR for 1B
is that if one guy fields a ball and starts a DP, it is treated the same as if a guy let’s the runner go to second and simply goes for the force at first.
Do the other systems take that into account?
Manny ain't the only bad man.
UZR takes DPs into account.
At least, Fangraphs’ does.
Anyways, Runs Saved does “Double Play Runs Saved credits infielders for turning double plays as opposed to getting one out on the play.”
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Feb 18, 2010 12:29 AM EST up reply actions
Has that changed since 2003?
Here -
Before I begin explaining the UZR system, keep in mind that there are at least two components of defense that UZR does not address: One, an outfielder’s “arm”, and two, an infielder’s skill at turning the double play. Of course, these skills can be measured (and they are in my Super-LWTS system). They are just not included in UZR. Like ZR, UZR is designed to measure and quantify only that skill which enables a fielder to turn batted balls into outs.
Manny ain't the only bad man.
I'm guessing that's from the ThinkFactory article?
Fangraphs has a modified UZR, yes. One which includes the DP runs (though those are usually all-but-negligible for a 1B)
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Feb 18, 2010 1:03 AM EST up reply actions
So, if I’m reading that right, Pujols saved 18 runs in 2007 and 15 runs in 2009. But, in 2007 his UZR was 18.8 and in 2009 his UZR was only 1.3. “Runs Saved” makes it seem like those years were fairly equal, but UZR says 2007 was much better. Which is more accurate?
OK, couple questions
What do they measure? Is one more important than the other? What did ‘07 Pujols do that ’09 Pujols didn’t?
I think +/- and Runs Saved are generally prefered
Since it’s basically an uber-scout who watches every single play by a player and makes a well-educated decision of if he should or should not have made the play.
The main problem is that it costs money to get. Worth it to me.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Feb 18, 2010 10:30 PM EST up reply actions
That makes sense
I know +/- measures the number of plays a fielder makes compared to an average fielder. Is there a simple explanation for “Runs Saved”? Does it take runners on base into account?
Runs saved is like +/- with a few position-specific adjustments.
IE: Double plays for infielders, outfield assists, and “home run saving catches” for outfielders.
Other than those it’s about pitchers and catchers, which is inconsequential for our concerns.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Feb 18, 2010 10:46 PM EST up reply actions
Drew has been more consistent than Markakis.
Markakis had a fantastic 2008, but that was his only great year.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Feb 16, 2010 7:45 PM EST up reply actions
Teix won the gold glove.
He had no defensive issues. He also hit 39 homeruns and led the AL in RBIs
Section 203 Row 15 Seat 1
Gold glove means nothing.
RBIs are a team stat
Home Runs are a horrible way to measure contribution.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Feb 17, 2010 1:42 PM EST up reply actions
No but he was the best first basemen in the AL
If Youkilis is so good why didn’t he win?
Section 203 Row 15 Seat 1
Golden Gloves are just silly awards voted on by writers
The players who get the most press typically win, as they’re the most visible. Teix was a high-priced free agent on a WC team, so he was under constant surveillance by everyone, which got him a lot of votes. I don’t buy that Teix was a bad defensive firstbasemen, but to my eyes he was not as solid a defender.
Why on Earth has Jeter won a billion of them when he's a bad fielder?
Gold Gloves are a joke. There’s little real correlation between good fielding and Gold Gloves.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Feb 18, 2010 1:06 PM EST up reply actions
He had 8 errors all last year.
Partially due to Tex at 1st. His range to his right is as good as ever.
Section 203 Row 15 Seat 1
Errors are a joke stat. Jeter gets to fewer balls, and as a result has fewer chances to commit an error.
The reason Jeter wins gold gloves is because he’s the Yankees shortstop who hits well and makes “web gem” plays largely as a result of his inability to get to balls in good time, plant his feet, and throw like a normal shortstop would . Instead, he has to pull bad-form jumpthrows which often enough get to the base after the runner.
He had a better year last year, but my question is why he got them in ’04, ’05, and ’06when he was ranked 32nd, 34th, and 34th amongst league shortstops on defense.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Feb 18, 2010 10:36 PM EST up reply actions
I heard that last season he played deeper
which covered for his anemic lateral motion.
Manny ain't the only bad man.
Possibly
Plus-minus gives him credit for more straight-on ground balls than usual, suggesting he was able to charge the choppers and the like. Though he did have a positive to his left for the first time ever, and his to-the-right numbers were also improved.
I’d guess it’s just a matter of a guy having a good defensive year. Most people agree that slumps can happen defensively unexplained, so the opposite would presumably also be true.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Feb 18, 2010 10:50 PM EST up reply actions
Youkilis or Teixeira?
Youkilis at the moment.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Feb 18, 2010 1:06 PM EST up reply actions
Especially when you factor in cost
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Feb 19, 2010 5:43 PM EST up reply actions
What they all said.
The better, cheaper player whose contract won’t be an albatross in five years.
Manny ain't the only bad man.
Dont get me wrong
Teixeira is also excellent, and I really, really wanted us to sign him (shifting Youk to 3B).
The difference between them is very small, though.
Albatross? I think not.
Tex doesn’t rely on athleticism nor does he play a position that requires much mobility. He doesn’t slap singles and rely on speed to get on base. He’s all power and patience. Those attributes age like wine, speed and slap age like milk.
Strikeouts are boring- Besides that, they're fascist. Throw some ground balls - it's more democratic.
by CasanovaWong on Feb 21, 2010 12:40 AM EST up reply actions
I don't think anyone is worth $20 million past age 35.
At least in the post-steroids era.
Manny ain't the only bad man.
He'll end up overpaid.
But not an albatross.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Feb 21, 2010 12:35 PM EST up reply actions
I have a hard time believing that Longoria will have a higher WAR than A-Rod
A-Rod clearly has the superior bat- his declining range at third base due to the surgery probably brought him down when you take into account that Longoria is only getting better, and Longoria is a very competent defender.
Still, I’d give A-Rod the edge. Call it Yankees fan bias if you want, but A-Rod is up there at Pujols level hittingwise, and I don’t think his defense as bad as everyone says. Last year, obviously, he was bad because of the surgery. But he got better as the year went on, and this season he’ll be 100%. His range should improve because of that.
when both play the same amount of games it will be very close
But A-Rod is 34 years old so there a reasonable chance of injury and of slight decline. The difference in the Chone projection is only 0.1 WAR. I actually think it will be greater, i believe Chone underestimates both. When Longoria is healthy he will easily beat 5.1 WAR. I’d see him around 7 WAR quite possibly even more while A-Rod will be around 6 WAR. Longoria is a very rare player of an absolutly elite glove combined with a very good bat that could develop into an elite bat. A-Rods defense is prolly league average now. Longoria has to be the preseason favorit to lead the AL East in WAR.
by German Red Sox Fan on Feb 15, 2010 8:31 PM EST up reply actions
League average glove, I take it?
Because that damn bat…
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Feb 15, 2010 8:42 PM EST up reply actions
i didn wanna say A-Rod sucks
he might finish with the second highest WAR in the AL East to bad the number one will most like be Longoria also a 3rd Basemen. Longo just has that really sick glove (he might be the best defensive 3rd baseman in all of baseball and i think alot of ppl havent realised that yet) to go along with that nice bat, while A-Rod has a league average glove with prolly the best bat not belonging to Pujols. Its that rare combination which makes him so special.
by German Red Sox Fan on Feb 15, 2010 8:49 PM EST up reply actions
Agreed
But that bat is gonna come along even further for Longo. He’s got tremendous power, some of which remains untapped. He’s fine tuning his plate approach. He’s ridiculously young…
Guy is gonna be an 8 WAR player regularly.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Feb 15, 2010 9:00 PM EST up reply actions
cause you just said ridiculously young
Justin Upton vs Evan Longoria who will have the better career?
by German Red Sox Fan on Feb 15, 2010 9:09 PM EST up reply actions
I'd like to see more than 1 season from Upton before I put him in Longo's league.
Especially with that .364 BABIP
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Feb 15, 2010 10:10 PM EST up reply actions
Young
25 and younger positional players
Longoria – 25 -.380 wOBA, 7.3 WAR
Upton – 23 – .388 wOBA, 4.5 WAR
Kemp – 25 – .367 wOBA, 5.0 WAR
Sandoval – 23 – 0.396 wOBA, 5,2 WAR
Tulowitzki – 25 – 0.393 wOBA, 5.4 WAR
that is a little misleading
Upton wont turn 23 untill the end of August this year. So he put up 4.6 WAR while being 21 for the majority of the season. Sandoval is a whole year older and might move to 1B rather sooner than later loosing alot of his value.
so its better to compare their lines in their 21 year old season:
Upton – 2009 – 138G – RF – .388 wOBA – 8.0 UZR/150 – 4.6 WAR
Sandoval – 2008 – 41G – C/1B/3B – .361 wOBA – 29.5 UZR/150 – 1.3 WAR
Longoria – 2007 – Minor Leagues
Kemp – 2006 – 52G – CF/LF/RF – .317 wOBA – -25.3 UZR/150 – -0.2 WAR
Tulowitzki – 2006 – 22G – SS – .275 wOBA – -30.5 UZR/150 – -0.6 WAR
So none of these guys was even remotely close to Upton when they were 21. He is just hard to predict cause very few player are in the MLB at age 21 let alone be 4.6 WAR players
by German Red Sox Fan on Feb 16, 2010 4:49 AM EST up reply actions
that isnt even a comparison
Longoria all the way!!!!!! What has Upton done anyways? 7 homers in 2 playoff series? But his regular season numbers are nothing to talk about, especially comparing him to players like Longoria.
Maybe your right
I hardly ever see Longoria play, and special defense is only something that you see if you watch a player every day. I learned that when I watched Teixeira last year- I never knew how good he was until I saw him every day. If Longoria’s defense is really that special, then maybe there is something to be said in that.
And just to make another point, I hope the Blue Jays get better at some point in the next few years, because they are truly terrible right now. That GM has a lot of work to do.
Uhh
You had me before you said A-Rod is up in Pujols level…..Nope not even close. That said I’d give A-Rod the edge as the hitter, Longoria as the fielder. Longoria has the benefit of being younger and will likekly improve…A-Rod – dunno. Gonna be tight
up on Pujols level hittingwise
don’t get me wrong, Pujols is probably better at this point, but it’s closer than you think. A-Rod’s last healthy, full season, he hit 54 home runs. This season, fully healthy (hopefully), not as much pressure, playing in Coors Field East will help him. If you take into account that last year he was hurt, and only played 124 games, and still got 30 and 100, in a full season I think he could top 40-45 home runs again, which is right up there with Pujols.
Still, my Yankees fan bias doesn’t take away the fact that I see that Pujols is the best in baseball. The guy is a beast- he’s the reason the Cardinals are my favorite NL team.
Not really
Here’s how each player has hit over the past three seasons:
2007: A-Rod (1.067 OPS/.449 wOBA) – Pujols (.997 OPS/.414 wOBA)
2008: A-Rod (.965 OPS/.413 wOBA) – Pujols (1.114 OPS/.458 wOBA)
2009: A-Rod (.933 OPS/.405 wOBA) – Pujols (1.101 OPS/.449 wOBA)
When you factor in A-Rod’s age (he’ll be 35 this year) and injury problems, the chances of him bouncing back to his pre-2008 level aren’t great. Pujols is 30-years old and has OPS’d 1.000+ in six of the last seven seasons. Most projections have both players hitting pretty much as they did the last two years. A-Rod is still a very good hitter. But he isn’t in Pujols’s league.
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Feb 16, 2010 9:52 AM EST up reply actions
Good point
We’ll see on the field, won’t we? Alex definitely has the ability to improve to his pre-2008 levels if he stays healthy-. Pujols definitely has the ability to get better also, although it’s tough to improve beyond what he is now. I mean, he’s so good.
We’ll see. I sure hope A-Rod can return to his pre injury numbers, because that probably means another MVP and a bigger chance of the Yankees winning (which I’m sure is what every Sox fan here is against).
Several team blogs
have the same same thing going, Baltimore’s is stretched out over a few weeks.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Five tips for Showtime’s second season of ‘The Franchise’
- The 10 best things about being a Detroit Tigers fan
- Surprise! A’s finally end the Yoenis Cespedes derby with $36 million deal for Cuban star
- The time Whitney Houston sang to Jim Bowden
- Pitchers and catchers! Mariners get early start in Arizona
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
