Billy Butler’s 2009 vs. Alex Gordon’s 2008
Other than Zack Greinke’s historic season, the 2009 Royals had little go right. Billy Butler was one non-Greinke bright spot. After a disappointing 2008, Butler raked in 2009, hitting .301/.362/.492 (.369 wOBA). He even became the everyday first baseman despite questions about his defense, beating out celebrated glove-man Mike Jacobs.
The Royals’ other “Savior,” Alex Gordon, has not quite (ahem) lived up to expectations. Hailed as “the next George Brett” upon being drafted in 2005, Gordon started at the hot corner on Opening Day 2007 and received a standing ovation. Things went downhill from there, as Gordon ended 2007 with a .317 wOBA. In 2008, he posted a merely decent .344 wOBA. Gordon got seriously injured to start 2009 , struggled upon returning, got demoted, and finally limped to a .321 wOBA (although 189 PA tells us next to nothing). The current attitude of many is understandable: Butler is The Man, and Gordon is a question mark at best.
Butler is clearly superior to Gordon as a hitter, and his minor league performances always indicated a higher offensive upside. But it is curious that so many smart people following the Royals have so readily hailed Butler’s 2009 as an awesome breakthrough while saying “meh” to Gordon’s decent 2008. Why is this curious? Because despite the glaring offensive disparity, we live in the Age of WAR. Let’s compare each player’s best season so far: Butler’s 2009 vs. Gordon’s 2008.
Butler’s 2009 value was excellent offensively at 21 runs above average. It was less impressive defensively. Despite looking better than expected, Butler posted a -6.7 UZR at first base (with a -12.6 overall positional adjustment). Butler’s overall WAR for 2009: an above-average 2.4.
Gordon’s 2008 value was more evenly distributed. +7.7 runs hitting, but only -3.0 UZR. However, the latter was accumulated while playing the much-more-valuable 3B. Altogether Gordon had a 2.6 WAR in 2008. It is obvious why many were down on Gordon’s 2008 relative to the Butler’s awesome 2009. Wait, what? Gordon was actually slightly more valuable in 2008 than Butler was in 2009?
Not really. After all, FanGraph WAR doesn’t currently include baserunning (other than SB/CS, which are included in wOBA/wRAA). Looking at the non-SB elements of baserunning using Baseball Prospectus’s EqBRR, as Erik did, we find that Butler was one of the worst baserunners in baseball in 2009 at about five runs below average, putting his WAR at about 1.9. In 2008, Gordon was about +3, which puts his WAR at about 2.9. So Gordon’s 2008 wasn’t “slightly” more valuable than Butler’s 2009, it was significantly more valuable. In fact, once baserunning is fully taken into account, Butler’s 1.9 WAR 2009 isn’t even quite as good as Gordon’s 2.1 WAR from his “disastrous” 2007.
My point is not about the relative value of Butler and Gordon going forward. Batting generally improves the most in the early 20s (whereas fielding and baserunning are relatively static), and Butler is two years younger than Gordon. There are legitimate questions about Gordon’s future given his performance and health. My intent is neither to run down Butler nor celebrate Gordon. One might respond that “Gordon’s value was primarily due to defense, position and baserunning!” But that is exactly the point — those things matter. Despite living in the Age of WAR, informed observers sometimes still focus on only one aspect of a player’s performance. And that can lead to a gap between a perception of one value disparity and the reality of the opposite.
Print This Post
Bill James is certainly optimistic! Jump to .350+ wOBA, 38 2Bs, 20 HRs, I am sure most Royals fans would take that, especially with at least league average defense at 3B…. Ahh Bill
A “jump” of 6 wOBA points from Gordon’s last healthy season is optimistic?
It is beyond me how we can all reasonably accept that three years’ worth of data defensively is the equivalent of one year’s worth of offensive output, yet factor in one year of defense into WAR and of a player’s overall defensive ability when that one season of UZR is not nearly enough of a sample to conclude what is being claimed. In relativity to these two players, the point of the article is well taken but I think also common knowledge to those who use common sense. Butler never had a position to begin with, which is a good reason not to draft high school designated hitters, but that’s another post. The bottom line is that neither is or ever will be as good as Baseball America expected.
Butler was 22 in 2009, and put up a .369 wOBA. Correct me if I’m wrong, but that kind of production at that age in the majors exceeds expectations that anyone would have for a prospect.
Richie, I’m not really sure that you’re getting what the author(s) are saying when they talk about needing three years of UZR data to equal one year of batting data: it’s about how much of a sample size is needed to become predictive. Since the article is about Gordon’s 2008 versus Butler’s 2009, and not necessarily focused on the future, the whole one year/three year isn’t all that relevant.
I understand where you are coming from, but if we are looking at how valuable a player was in 2009, the 2009 numbers are the only numbers we can use.
I disagree
twins: I agree that prorating 3 years of UZR data tells us more about a player’s true ability, but there is no way three years of UZR data can be included in one season’s worth of WAR.
Again, I don’t understand why they can’t. UZR is uses probability to determine defensive value. I understand that using past numbers to determine current year production seems disingenious. But, with the large error in UZR, I think that 3 year weighted UZR would actually give us a better estimate of performance than using only that years. I don’t know that for sure, but I don’t think that you absolutely should dismiss it.
Think of it this way. If someone was +10 +10 +10 -10, and another guy was -10 -10 -10 -10, obviously you’d project the first player to be better in the future. What I’m saying, is that he, more than likely, was better in the last year of the sample.
When things deviate from an established mean, they have a greater chance of being prone to “bad luck” than something that’s consistent with the mean.
Because we can’t know for sure how much of the variation is caused by differences in performance compared and how much is caused by measurement error, it’s up to you what you want to use. I like using multiple years, because I think it is more accurate estimate of performance. You can disagree, as I’m sure many will, I just don’t think you should say that past years should absolutely be ignored.
I think you and I are on the same page. The issue in question here is Player Ability vs. Value Earned.
There is no reason why they can’t be combined, but to create the most accurate model they must be measured separately first. Here is why: WAR tells us how much value, measured in single-season wins, a player earned for his team(s) during Season Z based on league averages of Season Z. If we introduce prorated player values (UZR let’s say) earned during Season X and Season Y, then our league averages (still just Season Z) become distorted multipliers. And if we include prorated league averages (X and Y) to match our prorated player averages then we are no longer calculating WAR, or single-season win values for Season Z. We are creating an assessment of player ability (past, present, future) similar to Marcel’s, CHONE, ZiPS, PECOTA, etc. Those are great, just like WAR is great, but like a Reese’s peanut butter cup we have to make the peanut butter and chocolate separately – completing the recipe for each – before we can combine them.
I agree that WAR isn’t perfect and I agree that using multiple years of data paints a more accurate picture of a player’s true ability, but that’s not what WAR is for.
I think you’re missing a pretty big part of the reason people are floored about Butler’s 2009. It’s not the very solid overall batting line, it’s that a light really seemed to go on for Butler in the second half. His post-AS numbers were .314/.385/.540. His BABIP remained virtually the same (a slight bump – .335 in 2nd half v. .329 in the first), his BB-rate jumped from 7.2% to 10.1%, and his ISO jumped from .159 to .226.
In the second half, Butler’s wOBA was something in the .380-.385 range, and when a 23-year-old shows that kind of improvement in the second half of a season, it’s often a sign of great things to come. I know that’s what excited me about Butler’s 2009, and I suspect I’m not alone.
I agree about Butler’s future being pretty exciting — but read my longer reply below, I didn’t make it as clear as I wanted to in the post above because of space reasons, but what I trying to say int he last paragraph is that I’m (badly, apparently) making a point about WAR and perception, not projected future value.
I agree (as I said in the post) Butler has (and has always had) serious upside with the bat, and he’d better considering his other “gifts” on the diamond. I would caution you, though, to remember that the notion of a “breakout” is very problematic (I’ll post more about this next week), and moreover that in-seasons splits (“look at what he did in the second half!”) have been found to have virtually no predictive significance.
Thanks for your comment.
Where have in-season splits been shown to have no predictive value? The last person I remember who looked at this was Bryan Smith back when he was still blogging with regularity. His methodology was pretty crude, but it showed that second-half OPS correlates closer with next year OPS than does season line. That was years ago, and may only have looked at young players/prospects. My memory on it is a bit hazy.
here’s some discussion on splits
http://www.insidethebook.com/ee/index.php/site/article/do_first_half_second_half_splits_mean_anything/
That study is based mainly on established major league players, and it really doesn’t apply in this situation.
Butler is 22, a highly touted prospect showing a new level of hitting for the first time. The fact that he did it in the second half may or may not be important, but he has shown us that he can hit at the next level over an extended period of time, and that is significant.
1) Butler was 23 in 2009 (trivia)
2) My point (and this isn’t the only thing about this) is not, to repeat yet again, that Butler isn’t a good hitter with a lot of upside. I say this repeatedly in the post. The poinst of the post is about value…
But to the splits thing: separating out his second half from his first half as if that has any great significance beyond the fact that his whole season was good doesn’t prove anything. The season as a whole was good, combined with his age, his previous performances (adjusted for age and level, etc., ) and so on, are the main reasons we think he’ll be a good hitter going forward. The second-half, _taken on its own_, adds little or nothing to that. 325 PA just isn’t all that much taken on its own, not compared to the 672 over the whole season, not when you take into account how much variance there is around a players true talent even over a whole season.
Things like this make me second guess WAR. Butlers fielding/base running was so below average that Gordon could make up a disadvantage of .150 OPS? Or a difference of 102 wRC for Butler compared to a 21 wRC for Gordon.
You’re forgetting the positional adjustment, which was also significant. 3B are just alot more valuable than 1B.
Things like this make me love WAR and second guess offense and common-sense perception. It’s almost as though all that moving around players do in the field and on the bases actually counts for something and isn’t just St. Vitus’ Dance or some kind of rodeo-clown routine designed to distract us until they get back to the real action – hitting.
Thanks, Matt! Fun stuff. I can’t wait until baserunning and catcher defense are added to WAR.
Really nice St. Vitus’ Dance reference. Thanks.
Good analysis Matt.
I hate this argument. I hate it! I hate it! I hate it! But I’m gonna say it: this seems like a lot of “statistical wrangling” to prove a questionable point. I feel like Butler’s been more valuable than Gordon was in 2008. I know “feel” is a terrible word, and the stats may say otherwise, but something doesn’t sit right here. At the very least, this article will make me follow the Royals more closely (I already had Greinke and Soria on my team last year, bring on the Blue Fever in 2010!).
Has anyone tried to adjust WAR to account for the weighted importance of position?
yes
It is weighted by position. If you look at anyone’s Value(WAR) stats there is a position adjustment.
Isn’t that basic premise of WAR?
Maybe it’s time for an offseason refresher of what WAR is and how it is ultimately reached?
Not David
Here’s a link to Dave Cameron’s series on Win Values:
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/glossary/#winvalues
I am glad you ended this the way you did. I see the point that there’s more to the game than OPS, ISO, or whatever measure you want to use that doesn’t include base running and defense. Still this is a player’s 2009 vs. another player’s 2008. Give me the more recent history please.
like what they ate for breakfast yesterday?
so gordens still a bust, right?
At this point, I’d say Gordon’s a “disappointment…” you want an obvious “bust?”
http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=2140&position=OF
Ha…had that one called as soon as I saw the link…although it was, as you said, obvious.
On an unrelated note, I’m really liking your stuff here. It’s interesting, and definitely a little bit of a different style then some of the other(also great) writers.
Butler’s season is considered better because Dayton Moore thinks a “sabr” is that “sword thing” from Star Wars. And a abnormally large number of KC fans buy into this mindset.
Umm…incorrect. A larger number of KC fans are screaming loudly about Moore’s idocy.
sorry must be as I only know about 6 KC fans I got the wrong read on the fanbase. However 5 of them support DM through thick and thin
This is a joke. While I respect WAR for what its worth, whatever happened to the “eyeball” test?? As a White Sox fan, I watch almost 80% of their games. I don’t care about baserunning or position or whatver, when Billy Butler came to the plate against us, I put my head down. I have also watched Alex Gordon over the years, he is what he is, a .260 hitter who will hit you 15 HR’s. Instead of looking at WAR, look at the history of the game of hitters early in their career (Butler is 23) who bang out a ton of doubles (he had 51!!), they end up translating to HR’s. I know this website claims he hits a lot of groundballs, ok fine. But I’ll guarantee you that a high majority of his doubles where gappers, deep balls down the line, or ball over OF’s heads instead of ground balls down the line where he is legging it out.
I guess what I am saying is that this article does nothing but make WAR look insignificant. It isn’t just Royals fans who think Butler’s 2009 was better (much, much) than Gordon’s 2008, it is the entire baseball community who can watch the game with their eyes. Just look at the front page of this website, Ben Zobrist was the best player in baseball according to WAR. Zobrist is a nice player, but give me Pujols, Zimmerman, Mauer, Crawford, or even Butler for this conversation.
Fun exercize. Put 8 Billy Butlers on the field, and let them play against 8 Alex Gordons, with the same pitcher. Who wins? How many fly balls in center does billy butler catch? How many groundballs to short does he get? You can tell me this doesn’t matter all you want, but it illustrates the basic premise here. There are only a certain amount of guys who can handle shortstop adequately. There are a few more that can handle third. There are way more that can handle first. It is way easier to find a slugging first basemen than third basemen. It’s especially easy to find a bad-fielding slugging first basemen. So how can you just ignore all that and spout off about how he’s a better offensive player? We all know he’s better offensively, that’s not the point.
“I don’t care about baserunning or position or whatver”
Well at least you admit it. You ignore most of the information at hand and look only at offensive contributions. As a white sox fan, do you also think Jermaine Dye was better than Alexei Ramirez last year? Was Jim Thome Better than Gordon Beckham? i don’t know about you, but as a twins fan, Jim Thome scared me a lot more than Beckham did.
You and Keizo Konishi would get along real well.
Perhaps this isn’t the site for you?
Really quickly, I just wanted to clarify something that got a bit lost in my attempt to keep the posting around 500 words.
What I was trying to make clear in the last paragraph, in particular, is that I’m not trying to talk about value going forward — indeed, in that case, I’d take Butler because of his performances at a younger age and also questions about Gordon.
However, as I tried (and failed) to make clear in the last paragraph, rather that projections for the two players (although it’s closer than you think…), I’m attempting to make a point about how performance are sometimes perceived versus their actual value. That’s why I felt okay using two separate seasons for the players — because of the way people reacted to those seasons respectively. I was taking perception by the same group of people (e.g., informed Royals fans) of two separate seasons, and trying to show how the “WAR concept” still can lead to surprising results that go against common perception.
Hopefully, that didn’t make it more confusing…
Thanks for reading everyone, I enjoy reading the comments. Even the ones that make me look stupid. Okay, not those so much, but sometimes the shoe fits…
A 500-word limit? That’s like making you type with 9 fingers tied behind your back. Keep up the good work, devil.
Hey guy,
I am sure 8 BJ Upton’s in the field would be more effective than 8 Albert Pujols in the field as well. I am guessing you would take Upton??
That was the most ignorant comment ever? 8 Alex Gordon’s in the field are better than 8 Billy Butler’s??? OK. But aren’t 8 Billy Butler’s in the line up better than 8 Alex Gordon’s then?
Where is this going?? Who would be worth more money on the open market right now? Alex Gordon is 1 year away from being non-tendered. Billy Buter is one year away from going .300-30-100. You keep your geek stats and I’ll keep my production.
That’s why the Twins will never get out of the 1st round, because you would rather go into the play offs with Nick Blackburn and Scott Baker leading your rotation instead of sacrificing AA players (who will never amount to anything) for an ace like Halladay or Cliff Lee.
Death, taxes, and Twins get bounced in the 1st round.
3 guarantees.
“I am sure 8 BJ Upton’s in the field would be more effective than 8 Albert Pujols in the field as well. I am guessing you would take Upton??”
Absolutely not. My “Geek stats” put Albert WAY ahead of upton in overall value.
“That was the most ignorant comment ever? 8 Alex Gordon’s in the field are better than 8 Billy Butler’s??? OK. But aren’t 8 Billy Butler’s in the line up better than 8 Alex Gordon’s then? ”
I was talking about the whole team. Lineup and defense included. Basically I’m just saying you can’t ignore position and defense.
“Where is this going?? Who would be worth more money on the open market right now? Alex Gordon is 1 year away from being non-tendered. Billy Buter is one year away from going .300-30-100. You keep your geek stats and I’ll keep my production.”
I was talking about present value, not value in the future.I was defending the assertion that Gordon was as or more valuable than Butler last year, not their future value.
“That’s why the Twins will never get out of the 1st round, because you would rather go into the play offs with Nick Blackburn and Scott Baker leading your rotation instead of sacrificing AA players (who will never amount to anything) for an ace like Halladay or Cliff Lee.
Death, taxes, and Twins get bounced in the 1st round.
3 guarantees.”
Way to sum it all up with a bunch of opinions irrelevant to the discussion.
Hey Matt, I have no idea where I saw this, but there was a link somewhere on this site to an article you did on catcher defense (and how many runs each guy was worth). I can’t find it, and I figured I’d post my plea in your article.
Link me?
http://www.drivelinemechanics.com/2009/10/13/1082419/2009-catcher-defense-filling-in
Grazi. So we should do what, add another half win to Mauer’s 8.2 total?
I posted on that, too…
http://www.drivelinemechanics.com/2009/10/15/1086115/2009-al-mvp-showdown-greinke-vs
Oh God, this is gonna be an endless link-a-thon.
Twins fan,
If you are just going to restate my comments, this isn’t going to be much fun.
All in all,
I know defense is valuable. After watching my Sox kick the ball all over the field for 4 years, I would be the first to tell you that defense is extremely important. Matter of fact, I am very tickled that they signed Omar today even though he is a spot infielder for us.
But my point is this, I know WAR includes all facets of the game. But for a person who really watches baseball, Butler is just way better. I am not talking about the future, I am talking about right now. Butler WAS a DH. He played most of the games in the field this year, while not great, he wasn’t that terrible. He hit .300 – 23 HR -93 RBI. This was in a line up with no good hitters, in an extreme pitchers park. I am willing to say that Alex Gordon has and never will come close to hitting .300 or driving in 90+ runs. Gordon may go better from 1st to 3rd than Butler, but who says he is exactly Brooks Robinson on the hot corner. He’s ok over there. You act like “just” because he plays 3B he is more valuable defensively than a 1B. That is just not true. Albert Pujols is much more valuable (in the field) than Mark DeRosa this year. Did you watch the playoffs? Did you see the impact Mark Teixeira made in the field compared to Alex Rodriguez? It wasn’t close.
You can’t just say because a guy plays 3B he is more valuable than a guy who plays 1B. While it may be harder to find a guy who is good at 3B defensively compared to a guy who is good at 1B, that doesn’t mean the position is more important on the field.
Adam Everett and Jack Wilson can probaly run circles around Derek Jeter, Miguel Tejada or Jason Bartlett. But what they bring to the table against the Jeters and Tejadas is uncomparable. That is what I feel about the Gordon-Butler comparison. Butler is going to be a star.
“If you are just going to restate my comments, this isn’t going to be much fun.”
I’m reposting your comments so you know what I’m replying to.
“While it may be harder to find a guy who is good at 3B defensively compared to a guy who is good at 1B, that doesn’t mean the position is more important on the field.”
Yes, that’s exactly what that means.
“Did you see the impact Mark Teixeira made in the field compared to Alex Rodriguez? It wasn’t close.”
the point is, its WAY easier to find someone of Mark Teixeira’s ability at first. Anyway, this is a bad example, because AROD is pretty poor at third and Teixeira is good at first. For a better example, take an average 3b and an average 1b. Are you really saying that they are equally valuable?
“Adam Everett and Jack Wilson can probaly run circles around Derek Jeter, Miguel Tejada or Jason Bartlett. But what they bring to the table against the Jeters and Tejadas is uncomparable.”
That’s true. And WAR (and any other sane person) would agree with you.
“Butler is going to be a star.”
I won’t disagree with that. But if he palys just like he did this year every year, he will be about an average player. We aren’t talking about the future here.
Anyway, here’s Butler’s 2009 compared with an average 1b.
Butler (2009): .301/.364/.492 OPS: .856
Avg 1b (2009): .272/.369/.470 OPS: .839
I don’t know about you, but I think a little bad defense and bad baserunning can make up for 17 points of OPS. Again, he might be a stud in the future, but as of last year, he was just a league average 1b.
You’re missing a subtle point here, though. It’s one a lot of people don’t understand, so I’m not ragging on you about it, but I do want to make it clear for you.
The positional adjustment only serves to indicate that it’s easier to find a first baseman who can put up replacement-level offensive numbers than it is to find a third baseman who can. It is in no way an attempt to say that third basemen are inherently more valuable.
What WAR is really intended to convey is the player’s overall value to the team in terms the front office can relate to. In this case, all that’s being said is that Butler is slightly easier to replace than Gordon in terms of overall value, and that’s because it’s harder to find a guy who can hit like Gordon and handle third base than it is to find a guy who can hit like Butler and handle first, because it’s SO much harder to find guys who can handle third PERIOD. That in no way implies that the Royals should be thinking “keep Gordon, ditch Butler”. It’s just a data point for them to keep in mind should they come across opportunities to upgrade which might involve one of the players.
It’s also worth noting that while defensive metrics are a lot better than they were even five years ago, they’re still evolving. As such Butler may be better (or worse) defensively than we think statistically, and Gordon may be worse (or better). That would naturally bend the results enough to make Butler the clearly superior player overall.
“The positional adjustment only serves to indicate that it’s easier to find a first baseman who can put up replacement-level offensive numbers than it is to find a third baseman who can. It is in no way an attempt to say that third basemen are inherently more valuable.”
Harder to find = less supply = more valuable. Am I missing something here? A league average hitter who plays third as well as an average third basemen is more valuable than a league average hitter who plays first as well as an average first basemen. You can look at it from different angles, but it always comes out the same.
Defense – The 3b is more valuable because he is better than an average fielder, while the 1b is worse than an average fielder. If you put them at the same position, the 3b will catch more balls, making him more valuable.
Scarcity – The 3b is more valuable because he is harder to find. By putting him at 3b, that frees up 1b for someone else. Justin Morneau would be incredibly more valuable if he played second base, because then Cuddyer could play first base, or they could sign a cheap, slugging 1b type.
Offense – This is probably the one you didn’t like – me comparing Butler to an average 1b. I agree this isn’t quite right, because just the fact that 1b hit better than 3b doesn’t neccesarily make it less valuable. This only works if you assume that teams are perfectly efficient when placing guys at positions. This is obviously a bad assumption, so I can understand why you’d call me out on this one. I just did it because it’s easier to illustrate that way, and the other ways sure weren’t getting through.
“What WAR is really intended to convey is the player’s overall value to the team in terms the front office can relate to. ”
Are you arguing that value to a front office is different than value to a team? I really don’t understand where you’re going with that.
As far as defense goes, I’m a huge proponent of using multiple years, regressing those towards scouting reports, and regressing that to the mean. I said Butler is a poor defender because I’ve read that he’s a poor defender. His UZR also helped with that valuation. Alex gordon has been about average at 3b in 310 defensive games, and I haven’t read anything saying he’s any better or worse than that. These numbers certainly could be off, but I think it’s a good bet going forward that Gordon is a better 3b than Butler is a 1b.
It’s also worth mentioning that the research that went into finding the positional adjustments is based on UZR data from a certain time period (I can’t recall off the top of my head, but I want to say 2001-2003? 1999-2002? It’s in the Book Blog). It measures actual differences between rate UZR values for players who have played two different positions.
It’s still an educated guess based on this data, but it does actually mean the average difference between the defensive performance between positions.
Agree with what you are saying, although…
I think part of the issue here is Gordon’s being older. Gordon’s nearly two full years older, and he played major college baseball, so there’s been a natural expectation that he’d be ready faster.
There’s also a scouting based concern as well. Because of (apparent) issues with pitch recognition and handling certain types of pitches, Gordon’s upside as a hitter looks much lower than we might have hoped. Whereas with Butler, we can still dream about an insane peak.
Everything else matters, of course, and I like AG’s all-around game, but its only natural when you realize that certain things may not materialize. With Butler, we always knew he was slow and couldnt field.
Right
I guess I should clarify again that my point was the perceived value of those seasons, not with the value of the players going forward.
But while Butler may have more value going forward, wouldn’t you say Gordon has more upside? He doesn’t need to hit nearly as well as Butler to be a good player, and it sometimes takes guys a while to break out.
As a Twins fan, I always got into the whole Gomez vs. Young debate. People would always say that Young has more upside. How could that be? Gomez only would have to hit a little to be a good player. Young obviously isn’t going to turn into a good fielder anytime soon, so he would need to take huge strides forward to be productive.
You don’t have to apologize, it wasn’t all that difficult to determine what you were saying.
lookatthosetwins:
See, it isn’t so bad postiing here (heh)!
People really think Delmon Young has more upside? I mean, he’s basically managed to achieve JOse-Guillen ness, except without the peak, just the suck. I’m not as much of a prospect hound, and I know Delmon has/had tools, but isn’t Gomez the essence of a player with tons of toolsy-upside (and in his case, as opposed to YOung, that at least translates into good defense)?
Just curious, I’m really surprised some Twins fans see it that way.
Ha, you remember that comment, huh. Anyway, you can see from this thread why I normally avoid it. Minutes of my life. Wasted…
Gordon is an absolute butcher and needs to move off 3B. My first thought when they traded for Getz was that they’d be moving Callaspo over there and Gordon to RF. Then I remembered that Dayton Moore is the GM. The full story on Gordon is that they knew his swing needed to be completely reworked in ST 06 but let him go through an entire AA season without even telling him, much less working on it. So then they decided to start him out in the majors in 07 and completely rework his swing while also realizing that his actions at 3B are so bad that even the great Buddy Bell could not clean it up. On and on and on. I feel bad for the guy. It is hard to imagine an org handling a top talent so badly. On the bright side, it is not possible to handle a guy worse than they did Greinke and he turned out okay. Karma says no on Gordon turning it around in KC, and the only way they get that karma credit back is selling low on him to a team with a short RF porch, in need of a RF, and management who are not idiots. Gordon for Hellickson maybe? At this point I’d take Barnese and be happy.
Thank you. That is what I was trying to say. Just because Gordon plays 3B, that automatically makes him more valuable even though isn’t good in the field?
Garrett Atkins plays 3B in Colorado and is miserable over there. He can’t play 1B (not that he’s any better there) because Helton plays there. But according to some in this discussion, Atkins is more valuable to the Rockies because they plop his terrible glove in the field at 3B. Someone has got to play there (3B), right?
So if KC got rid of Gordon and brought up another slug from Omaha to play 3B, who couldn’t field or hit, but just ran out to the position of 3B, that automatically puts him points ahead of value than Butler?
“Butcher!” no data I can find supports that claim. Looking here Gordon’s UZR/150 has been +7.9, -3.6, -2.7 over the last three years at 3rd (2007-2009). Average defense is said to be +\- 5 or between -5 and +5 UZR. So Gordon was above average in 2007 and average to slightly below in 2008 and 2009. I would not call him a butcher at all. He is more like an average defender at third.
Matt, can this be turned into a series?
Up next 2008 Carlos Gomez vs. 2009 Michael Cuddyer???
Ha. That would piss of a minnesotan or two. One thing about that, though, is it would be completely about extreme 1 year UZR samples. I have serious doubts that Gomez was more valuable in 2008 than Cuddyer was in 2009.
But isn’t the point of this “series” to point out how much better at the plate DH quality fielders have to do to contribute as much as guys who actually contribute on the defensive side.
By pretty much all accounts, Carlos Gomez is a top 10-ish CF. If his UZR comes down from it’s extreme value of 16, it would have to be complemented with top 10-ish quality. Without looking too hard that means UZR/150 is in the 10 to 16 range, with me thinking Carlos is more like a top 5, I tend to place him in the 13 to 16, but I’ll say at least 10 for UZR/150. Even using that lower UZR than what was actually posted, Carlos Gomez in 2008 is close to Cuddyer in 2009.
@lookatthosetwins:
Umm, I wasn’t responding to you. I was about to spit out several dozen paragraphs explaining myself, but then I realized that you thought I was responding to you rather than to cygar13. And since I was actually agreeing with everything you said, I’m confused as hell as to why you decided to open an argument with me on it. I was making the point to cygar13 that the positional adjustment within WAR isn’t an attempt to claim third basemen are more valuable than first basemen, in response to him saying “You can’t just say because a guy plays 3B he is more valuable than a guy who plays 1B.” In fact, you objected to me saying that third basemen are not inherently more valuable, which is absolutely true unless “inherently” means something other than what I think it means.
As to this: “Are you arguing that value to a front office is different than value to a team? I really don’t understand where you’re going with that.”
I’m saying that value to a front office is completely and utterly disconnected from what the player has accomplished in the past (aka, his “value” in the past). NO player has “value” in the past from the FO’s perspective. The FO is concerned with what the player will do in the future. The overall point I was trying to get at was that whether Butler’s 2009 was more or less valuable than Gordon’s 2008 in the sense that we sometimes think of value (i.e., “Who’s the most valuable player?”) has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with whether Butler or Gordon has more value to the Royals on November 23, 2009. To answer THAT conundrum, one needs to examine their projections going forward, not their performance going backward (comprehending, of course, that said performance is still relevant insofar as it informs said projections).
Ha. That makes so much more sense… I need to quit writing responses at 2 a.m.
Interesting read. I hadn’t thought about a comparison between the two seasons as conventional stats favor Butler by a large margin but WAR interests me and is a stat I want to learn more about.
P.s.This debate will never ever match the intensity of Harvey vs Pickering but what will?
“beating out celebrated glove-man Mike Jacobs”
ROFLMAO
I am actually somewhat optimistic about the Royals chances to beat 81 wins in 2010. All it would take is 150 starts by roughly the 2008 version of Alex Gordon and Mike Avilas (SS) (2-3 WAR each). 150 starts and age based improvement from Callaspo and Butler (2-2.5 WAR). The same WARs from Dejesus, all the Catchers, as 2009 (both over 3). A zero WAR from right field and DH (Jacobs and Guillen I know this is optimistic). Greinke to be nearly as good as last year (6-8 WAR). 150+ innings each from Bannister, Tejeda, Meche pitching as well as the Bill James projections (each would be roughly 2+ WAR). Hochevar to improve more like scouts believe and get his FIP into the low 4s (Bill James projections have him in the high 4s) with also 150 innings (1.5-2 WAR). Bullpen to be on par or better than last season (3+ WAR total). That makes roughly 33 WAR or an 81-83 win team roughly, so it is reasonable to project a .500 team for the Royals if they stay really healthy.