Jayson Werth is Not the Problem (Yet)

There probably were some analysts who liked Jayson Werth‘s seven-year, $126 million contract for the Nationals when it was signed prior to the 2011 season, but no names spring to mind. It was not that Werth had been a bad player. There was actually an argument to be made that the contract was market value for a player of Werth’s projected value, but it was an open question as to whether a team in Washington’s situation should have been paying market value at that point, as Dave Cameron noted at the time.

The last point was based on the question of whether or not the Nationals would be good enough during the first part of the contract to justify making such an aggressive move. After a near-.500 2011 season, the Nationals held up their end of the deal in 2012, going 98-64 and winning the Natinal League East. They lost to the Cardinals in NL Division Series, but given the excellent young talent they seemed primed to make a few more runs with Werth still is his decent years.

But Werth was not really holding up his end. In 2011, he did not hit that well, and in 2012, he missed about half the season due to injury. This season, the Nationals are having an extremely disappointing season given the expectations raised by 2012. Many things have gone wrong for Washington this year, but Werth is not one of them.

Not everyone agrees, of course. A recent piece sees Werth as, “a recent hot streak aside, a substitute-level right fielder.” (The article contains other things worth discussion, but my focus here is Werth.) To put it mildly, that is unfair. Werth is hitting .328/.406/.529 at the moment — good for a 161 wRC+, a rate on par with the 162 wRC+ Ryan Howard, whom the author compares to Alex Rodriguez and Albert Pujols at one point in the article, put up in his best season. Even with time lost to injury and poor fielding ratings, Werth is valued at about three wins. That is far from being “substitute-level.” Despite the disappointment of his first two seasons in Washington, Werth looks to be earning his $16 million this season. He is not putting up superstar production, but as in Philadelphia (where he averaged almost five wins a year over his last three seasons) he has been more than just “above average.”

There are two separate issues here: the long-term and the short-term impact of Werth’s performance relative to his contract. His age (Werth is 34) and injury history are obviously big factors with respect to the former. But the short- and long-term factors are related, so this year’s production might provide some hope.

For all the worries about his production, Werth only has had one bad season with the bat during the last few years — his first season with the Nationals, when he he .232/.330/.389. Even last year when he was held back by injuries, he hit a respectable .300/.387/.400 (128 wRC+). Fielding metrics did not like Werth, which brought his 2012 value down, and that is a legitimate concern, but we also know that fielding metrics are far less reliable than offensive metrics.

Focusing on Werth’s offense, what was especially troubling in both 2011 and 2012 was the departure of his power stroke. After three straight seasons with an isolated power (ISO) over .220 in Philadelphia, in 2011 and 2012 Werth’s ISO dropped to .157 and then .140. His semi-rebound last season was based on a combination of a lowered strikeout rate (something that might be sustainable due to Werth’s improved contact rate) and a high batting average on balls in play (we know how that goes).

In 2013, Werth is pretty clearly hitting at a level over his head. It is not just a “recent hot streak,” as he had an okay-ish April (102 wRC+), missed almost all of May with injury, and has been hot ever since. Still, having a career-best wRC+ at 34 is unlikely to be a sudden revelation of true talent. Particularly glaring is Werth’s .377 BABIP. This should not be totally dismissed, as Werth has always been a high-BABIP hitter (.332 career), but he is not this good.

Two elements in particular show that Werth’s 2013 might be a legitimate improvement over the last two season, despite the high BABIP. First, although his strikeout rate is not as good as it was in 2012, a 20.1 K rate would be the second-lowest mark of his career, and he seems to have retained the improved contact rate from 2011 and 2012. He is not a contact machine now, but putting the ball into play more often is a good thing.

Maybe more significant is the return of Werth’s power. His .201 ISO this season is not what it was during his Philadelphia years, but it is good and has been accomplished alongside his improved strikeout rate. Along with his walk rate (still good for Werth) and contact rate, isolated power correlates highly from season to season relative to other rates. The power surge is based on an improved rate of home runs rather than doubles and triples, which is even more promising. Werth’s rate of doubles and triples on hits in play in 2013 is the lowest of his career, while his 2013 home run on contact rate is his best since 2007. In 2011 and 2012 his home runs on contact rate was about five and two percent, respectively. This season, it is at about seven percent. Extra-base hits in play rates fluctuate far more than home run rates. This means a low number of doubles is likely to regress more up to the mean, and a high rate of home runs is less likely to do so.

Everything is subject to random variation and the effects of age, and Werth is probably over his head in most aspects of his hitting this year. However, some of the areas in which he has made improvements over the last two seasons are more likely to stick to a greater extent than others.

While Werth is probably never going to be the five-win player he was at his apex, and his fielding may be problematic, for the next couple of seasons he can probably be counted on for above-average production as long as injuries do not totally derail him. The contract is still probably going to be ugly at the end. Contrary to what some may think, he is not getting paid to like a superstar, but the contract is so long that the back loaded years at the end will be pretty onerous as he declines. Of course, this is true of almost all long-term contracts for veterans. Remember when people thought Carl Crawford‘s contract was so much better than Werth’s?

Even if Werth might not be quite up to his salary at the tail end of his deal, he is also substantially better than “substitute level.” The contract was not a great idea at the time, and probably will not end up being one later, either. But whatever problems his contract might cause for the Nationals in the future, Werth is not one the Nationals’ problems right now.



Print This Post



Matt Klaassen reads and writes obituaries in the Greater Toronto Area. If you can't get enough of him, follow him on Twitter.


Sort by:   newest | oldest | most voted
Landon Jones
Member
3 years 29 days ago

There’s a typo in Werth’s slash line. He’s slugging .529 not .429.

Landon Jones
Member
3 years 29 days ago

He also slugged .440 in 2012. Good piece though!

G.Lyons
Guest
G.Lyons
3 years 29 days ago

I’m thinking you mean “zenith” rather than “nadir”

David
Guest
3 years 29 days ago

I seen it, like a 27-inch zenith, believe it.

MrKnowNothing
Guest
MrKnowNothing
3 years 29 days ago

I think contacts like his look better now bc of the explosion in money since he signed.

Not that they’re totally comparable but he’s getting less money over more years than Josh Hamilton.

Steve
Guest
Steve
3 years 29 days ago

And I still think he can be more valuable to the Nats than Hamilton will be for the Angels. Woojah!

Rule of Law
Guest
Rule of Law
3 years 29 days ago

You’re an embarrassment to your country, Klaaaaassssssen.

supershredder
Guest
supershredder
3 years 29 days ago

It’s worth noting, in regards to his poor ISO rates in 2011 and 2012, that Werth complained of lingering wrist issues from his April 2012 surgery prior to Spring Training and was optimistic that it would soon heal completely. Thus implying a return to form during this season.

AC of DC
Guest
AC of DC
3 years 29 days ago

Additionally for consideration: Citizens Bank Park is slightly more HR-friendly than Nationals Park (102 to 100 per Fangraphs Park factors from 2010-2012), they’re even on 2B, and Werth has never had the legs to be a triples guy. This could account for a little bit of the ISO drop, but not a ton.

More likely, we might be inclined to recognize those peak ISO years (’09 and ’10 particularly) as at least partially flukey, as is often the case to some degree with peak years. In 2009 he hit 26 2B and 36 HR, a career best for the long ball. In 2010 he hit a whopping 46 doubles (with a .352 BABIP!), but just 27 HR (close to his 2008 total of 24). In 2011 he once again hit 26 doubles (normal) and 20 HR (low but closer to his usual) and his ISO didn’t end up as pretty (09-11 all featured similar PA totals). Of note, his PA/HR rate this year (21) is very close to his good-but-not-peak-ISO 2008 rate (20.1).

Point being he’s unlikely to see those peak totals again, but if he can stay healthy, keep up the walk and contact rates, and post 25 2B and 22 HR a year (give or take a strong breeze or two), he’ll be a dandy corner OF. Worth the contract? Not my department, but he ain’t on a small-market team.

triple-A city
Guest
triple-A city
3 years 28 days ago

As a Nats fan, I never thought the contract was worth griping about. It was of course a pretty outlandish expenditure for a sub-elite (but obviously quite good) outfielder on the wrong side of 30, but we were a team with a small payroll and rich owners. We like to judge the quality of a contract in terms of dollars versusproduction both now and at the end, but isn’t a truer valuation the extent to which the contract prevents your team from acquiring other players? If that contract had hamstrung the Nats financially and left them with no room to sign other free agents, then yes the Werth deal would have been an irresponsible travesty. As it is we got a real live ballplayer on our 59-win team! It was great. And we still had oodles of money to spend if the GM ever felt like it.

NatsLady
Member
NatsLady
3 years 29 days ago

Try to remember that what put him out in 2012 was not an age-related injury. He broke his wrist. That affected his power upon his return, and even early this season. He was using a lighter bad and going for singles until his wrist fully healed (about mid-season of this year), when he took up the heavier bat again.

NatsLady
Member
NatsLady
3 years 29 days ago

Also, bear in mind that at the end of his contract (age 38, 39) Werth will be managing the Nats. That should add some value.

steve-o
Guest
steve-o
3 years 29 days ago

I to laugh at Werth’s first year numbers with the nationals.

Nicolas C
Guest
Nicolas C
3 years 29 days ago

Why are all writers on this site starting to refer to themselves as the author? It’s not good writing…did they teach you guys that in school?

Alexander Nevermind
Guest
Alexander Nevermind
3 years 29 days ago

That doesn’t occur in this article

Iron
Guest
Iron
3 years 28 days ago

“The author” referred to here was Ross Green, the author of an article referenced just one sentence prior.

Jason B
Guest
Jason B
3 years 28 days ago

Notice how people usually don’t circle back around with a mea culpa after their point gets totally eviscerated?

Jason B
Guest
Jason B
3 years 28 days ago

“Their point” = their condescending, nit-picky, and wholly incorrect point?

Jon
Guest
Jon
3 years 28 days ago

One thing to add on the improved power. Don’t forget that last year Werth broke his wrist very early on. We know any hand injury saps power for about a year. When he came back last year, the only thing he didn’t do was slug. Since about a year removed from that broken wrist, the slugging has been there.

A little more evidence – however slight – that the power surge may be normalizing as opposed to a fluke.

Loop D
Guest
Loop D
3 years 28 days ago

With all the cost-controlled contracts of potential regulars prior to the 2011 season (Strasburg/Harper/both Zimmermans/Ramos/Espinosa/Storen/the pick that became Rendon/etc) the impact of the Werth contract on the Nats’ payroll was/is mitigated. It was a smart investment that made sense for a young team. Also at the time addition by subtraction vs intra-division foes, the Phils.
Also as a Mets fan I’d love to have a dude like that around for $16 mill. He seems like a a good clubhouse guy. Absolute upgrade over Bay and Bonilla.

Stringer Bell
Guest
Stringer Bell
3 years 28 days ago

If the Nats are unimpressed with his bat, I suggest Prince Fielder for Jayson Werth for my sanity. Sound good? SOUNDS GREAT LET’S DO IT!

ToddM
Guest
ToddM
3 years 28 days ago

I’m confused. Is this a three way trade? Who gets your sanity? And what are you going to do with Jayson Werth? Seems like a lot to pay for a valet or butler.

AA
Guest
AA
3 years 13 days ago

I’m pretty sure VPower is responsible for this :-P

wpDiscuz