Friar Vizquel
After a solid enough 2007 season that saw the Padres come within one game (resist urge to make Holliday slide comment) of making the playoffs, the team took a large step back. In 2008, Bud Black’s bunch finished 63-99, four games worse than the Pirates. They managed to outperform the Nationals, but some minor league squads could have accomplished that feat. Offensively, the team not only struggled but lacked consistency and durability. Only Brian Giles, Adrian Gonzalez, and Kevin Kouzmanoff played 145+ games. The same can be said of their pitching, where nobody made over 27 starts.
GM Kevin Towers cut ties with Khalil Greene this offseason, opening up a spot at shortstop. According to reports, that void may be filled as soon as this weekend, as the team has been talking to Omar Vizquel. Omar is not going to sign a 5-yr deal to become the new face of the team, or anything along those lines, but as a one season stopgap, the deal potentially makes sense.
Vizquel turns 42 years old on April 24 and is coming off of a disappointing, injury-plagued season. We all know his value primarily comes from the defensive side of the spectrum, as outside of the 1996 and 1999 seasons, his wOBA has been average at best. Even last season, when he partook in just 92 games, Vizquel managed a +5 UZR rating. Granted, he hit .222/.283/.267 with a .235 wOBA, but he was anything other than a liability defensively.
In 2007, with a full season under his belt, Vizquel saved just about +20 runs defensively. From 2004-07, he provided solid defense in 145+ games, and save for a couple of seasons, has been very durable. In fact, the value he gains above replacement simply for the number of plate appearances amassed generally counteracts his lack of offensive prowess.
Take a look at that 2007 season as an example. His offensive worth fell to -22.7 runs, but he produced a win total above average. How? Outside of the +20 defensive runs, he earned +6.7 runs for a positional adjustment and +19 runs for his number of plate appearances. All told, Vizquel played +2.3 win baseball that season, a number that fell below his marks from 2004-06. Over the last five seasons, his win values are +2.6, +3.4, +3.6, +2.3, and -0.3.
If Vizquel played more last season and lacked the health issues, he would have earned more runs for both of the adjustments. It is also likely that his UZR would have risen. Suffice it to say, the -0.3 wins is not, on its own, an accurate representation of what the Padres would receive. Most likely, they would be getting 140+ games and 600+ PA of +9 fielding and -17 hitting. With adjustments similar to those received in his durable years, Vizquel’s projection pegs him as a +1.8 win player next season.
Even at 42, Omar will be right around the league average given his ability to play stellar defense at the toughest non-catcher position. His fair market value would be in the $8 mil range. If Towers can ink Vizquel to a 1-yr deal for $8 mil or less, go for it. Anything requiring more funds or commitment would not be very wise, though. And if injuries are a big concern, an incentive-laden deal in terms of plate appearances would protect their investment.
The move does not have anything near the flash value of the major signings this offseason, but has the potential to improve the Padres while simultaneously providing them nothing more than a stopgap veteran. One has to wonder, though, if the team does not project to perform that well next season, why not give some younger players ample playing time? With Brian Giles also on the club, adding Vizquel makes the team even older, seemingly counterintuitive to a team trying to rebuild. Perhaps, then, the rebuilding will not impact the major league club until the trading deadline, or even 2010. Bottom line, though, in a vacuum, signing Vizquel would provide an overall upgrade over the departed Greene while not requiring much commitment.
23
I believe Randy Winn is still with the Giants. The Padres are old enough as it is; no sense in piling on, though. :)
Haha, yeah, duly noted.
Vizquel’s range, as defined by his ability to prevent ground ball hits going to the outfield, has slipped slightly each of the past five seasons, to where he is now slightly below average. However, he remains one of the most sure handed shortsops, in the top 5 in not allowing infield hits or runners reaching on errors.
+10, +6, +20, +5 in UZR over the last four seasons. Not sure how that’s below average. He isn’t as good as he was before but he is still above average.
Via + – if you don’t like UZR, +7, +20, +9 over the last three years.
1 year 8 million?
I’m pretty sure if the Padres offered him a starting job and anything over 1 million he’s sign.
I would sure hope so. The $8 mil is his fair market value assuming he plays 140 games at around 580 PA, with -17 hitting and +9 fielding at SS. Doesn’t mean he’ll get anything near that, but that’s what his +1.8 WAR would merit.
Eric, I meant his range, his ability to keep grounders from being outfield hits is just a hair below average. His ability to turn balls he gets to into outs is still outstanding. Overall, those two combined, make him well above average.
I don’t understand why there is value over replacement in amassing plate appearances with such poor numbers. Can you explain this differently? No offense, but I just feel like there is something fishy when a player as apparently finished (or close to it) as Vizquel is said to have a fair market value of $8 million.
WY, it comes from evaluating players above the replacement baseline as opposed to the average baseline. For instance, Vizquel projects to -17 runs below AVG and +9 runs fielding above AVG. These are numbers above/below average. With the positional adjustment taken into account (+9 at SS is VASTLY better than +9 anywhere else), Vizquel is roughly -1 runs below average, or -0.1 wins below average.
However, we are not evaluating him relative to the league average. Instead, we evaluate players above the replacement level. An average player is approximately 20 runs above a replacement level player, because even league average or slightly below average players have value.
The 20 runs is for 600 PA, so it is prorates for PA numbers below that. Vizquel has been right around +19 runs in the past for this adjustment. If we add that to the -1 runs below average, we get +18 runs above replacement, or +1.8 wins. At $4.5 mil/win, 4.5*1.8 = ~8 mil. If he was a +9 in LF, or 1B, his value would greatly diminish. Because he is still playing very good defense at the toughest non-catcher position, his offense is almost cancelled out.
The +20 runs per 600 PA, though is essentially the conversion rate to go from average as a baseline to replacement level. In Vizquel’s case, he was -22 runs offensively below average. If he ended up breaking even with fielding and positional adjustment (say -7 fielding, +7 adjustment), then his actual value would be the -22 runs adjusted to be above/below replacement level, not average. So, +20 runs roughly would be added. It’s really just the way to look at players above a different baseline.
An average player is +20 runs per 600 PA better than a replacement player. If someone is putrid offensively in those 600 PA, then the lack of offensive skill will cancel out with the +20 adjustment.
And if it seems that he is more washed up than the numbers suggest, see what a different percentile projection would be. Perhaps you think he’ll play 140 games at 580 PA, but be worth -22 runs offensively and just +6 runs on defense. This would make him:
-22+19+7+6 = +10, or +1.0 wins, a $4.5 FMV.
MGL posted Vizquel’s sUZR’s last season:
http://www.insidethebook.com/ee/index.php/site/comments/uzr_and_the_2008_gold_glove_awards/#7
Pretty insane.