Nice Try, But… The Dodgers’ Left-Field Platoon
Platooning is a smart idea for teams having trouble filling a position. However, it requires the right players to make it work. While the Dodgers have a nice idea in trying to use a platoon in left field, by populating it with Jay Gibbons and Marcus Thames, they are probably going to get weak overall offense, potentially horrible defense, and an unwieldy roster.
I am grateful to Ned Colletti and the Dodgers for giving me the motivation to update and improve my basic spreadsheet for estimating hitter platoon skill. I’m sorry to report that the results I get once I plug in the overall projections from CAIRO are so unfavorable.
Thames himself isn’t really a problem as a hitter. For the money, a .249/.311/.448 with a .327 projected wOBA (according to these weights) isn’t all that bad for a platoon hitter. Thames’ platoon skill gets exaggerated because people forget that right-handed hitters’ platoon splits regress heavily to the mean. However, even after accounting for that, I have him as a .344 wOBA hitter versus southpaws, and .314 versus righties. He’s a decent choice for the right-handed half of a platoon.
The problem is Gibbons. I’m happy that he returned to the minors not long after we mentioned him in a “where are they now” post last year. The lefty is the key to any platoon because a) he will get most of the plate appearances, and b) since the platoon skill of lefties varies more than that of righties, by finding a guy with a bigger-than-usual split, a team can leverage that for maximum value. Unfortunately for the Dodgers, Gibbons is a probably a terrible hitter overall at this point in his career (CAIRO projects .256/.296/.409 for .304 wOBA). Moreover, he doesn’t have a very large split — his observed split is actually slightly smaller than the league average for lefties over the past four seasons. When I run his catcher-esque .304 wOBA projection through the mighty platoon-a-tron, I get a Jason Kendall-esque .283 wOBA versus southpaws, but hey, he might hit .311 versus righties, so, oh… wait, that’s worse than his platoon partner’s projected wOBA versus righties? Uh oh…
Generously assuming that the platoon works “perfectly” and that one-third of the plate appearances are Thames versus a lefty, one gets about a league-average hitter, or, assuming average defense, about a 1.3 WAR two-headed left fielder. Not terrible for the money, but hardly what a contender wants to see in one of their starting spots.
And about that “average defense”: Thames is a guy who has bad defensive numbers that don’t quite match his horrible reputation, but keep in mind that the sample is limited because he’s seen as so bad that both Detroit and New York opted to put him at designated hitter as often as they could. As for Gibbons, his numbers from his days in Baltimore are better than I thought, but keep in mind that a) Baltimore was so “impressed” with his outfield skills that they constantly shuffled him between the outfield, first base, and DH, and b) that was several years and injuries ago. My guess is that combined 5 runs below average over a full season is kind, but that still puts them under 1 WAR combined. At that point, one has to wonder if the Dodgers aren’t better off just going with Tony Gwynn, Jr.’s glove-only approach in left (or preferably, center with Matt Kemp switching to left) rather than taking up all the extra roster space.
That is the final reason, beyond the offensive and defensive issues, that this seemingly inexpensive roll of the dice is problematic: the Dodgers are going to have to keep Gwynn around anyway. Gibbons and Thames can barely play the corner outfield, and with the other starting outfielders being right fielder Andre Ethier and center fielder Matt Kemp (who are unlikely to overshadow the Ichiro Suzuki-Franklin Gutierrez combination anytime soon), the Dodgers are going to need someone to back up Kemp in center. So Gwynn has to stay. That is five roster spots taken up with outfielders for very little gain. Thames has a place on a major league roster as a right-handed DH/emergency outfielder and Gibbons is nice Triple-A depth/minor league deal material. As a left-field platoon on a team trying to contend, they aren’t a winning combination.
What happened to Xavier Paul? I thought they finally cleaned out their aging LF corps so they could give him a shot. Surely, he deserves at least a mention as an option.
If they believe in him, then really there’s no reason for the Dodgers to waste much money on anyone better than Gibbons or Thames.
Paul was up last year and put up fairly unimpressive numbers (no HRs IIRC) so maybe LA FO decided to go another route instead of playing him full-time.
Pawlikowski said as much last November:
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/the-dodgers-desperate-need-for-a-left-fielder/
“That is six roster spots taken up with outfielders for very little gain.”
Wouldn’t it be five?
I feel like Gibbons is to difficult to accurately predict. He has never played in the NL and is far removed from meaningful MLB playing time. Besides, he is supposed to be fighting with Xavier Paul in spring training for the left handed half of the platoon.
That was either a typo or the Super New Saber-Math.
LOL, though I thing there is a better than 50% chance that Casey Blake spends a fair amount of time in the outfield against left handers, with Uribe moving to third and Carroll playing second. So that would give you six.
“Neddie, you’re doing a heck of a job.”
Exactly. It’s Ned Colletti does anyone really expect great things?
Agent Ned!
Yaaaaaaaayyyyyyy Ned Colletti!
maybe the Cubs can dump Fukudome on the Dodgers…
dump? I thought fukodome is a good player? last year .263/.371/.439 with avg defense over past 3 yrs. maybe you think he’s too expensive?
maybe the dodgers can sign johnny damon! i hear he is still looking for a job… so is manny. LETS PLATOON MANNY AND DAMON!!!! haha no im just kidding. thames is a good bat against lefties, especially as a pinch hitter against lefties, but he should not be starting in the field. and if he projects better against righties than his platoon partner… ouch!
“going with Tony Gwynn, Jr.’s glove-only approach in left (or preferably, center with Matt Kemp switching to left)”
If there is going to be OF shuffling in LA for Gwynn, I think most observers would expect Kemp and his strong arm to go to RF and for the less-mobile Andre Ethier to move to LF. But Gwynn will have to hit the ball hard a lot this spring for Dodger management to actually do that. And Paul will have to have a ridiculous spring to make the team as well, but I suppose he only has to be better than Gibbons to win the job as the LH half of the platoon.
You guys have to be kidding me throwing these names out there. Gibbons is 33 going on 34, has never hit for average, hasn’t played significantly ML baseball in 3 yrs, is a pass steroid user, and is a very bad defender. Tony Gwynn has NEVER hit for avg or pwr in the minors or majors. People rave about his defense, but can that cancel out the fact that he won’t get on base enough to help a team win. The bottom line here is that X. Paul is the best option the Dodgers have. Anyone who has any baseball sense would see that. The guy has averaged a 320 BA in Triple A. His #’s have gone up every year since High A. He’s a 5 tool guy and he brings more to the table than anyone they have besides Kemp and Ethier. If this guy doesn’t play in LA he’ll become a star somewhere else just like James McDonald, Carlos Santana, Jason Werth, Shane Victorino, and countless others.
James McDonald and Dicktorino are “stars”?
Calling them stars might be a little bit of a reach I suppose, but Victorino is a consistent 3-win player that provides above average offense and defense.
McDonald was very good after leaving last year, putting up 1.7 WAR(however fluky pitcher WAR is) in just 11 starts. Unreal FIP of 2.91.
As a Giants fan, I hope you are correct about this particular platoon, but I have a problem with your qualifier ” for teams having trouble filling a position” in your first sentence.
Do you have evidence to support the implication that platooning is not a good idea except as a last resort?
It seems to me that, prima facia, platooning is a good idea, for many reasons, if a team has 2 reasonably comparable players with opposite splits at one position. The burden of proof must fall on the one denying the prima facia case.
One question I have about platooning . . . and I’ll set it up with a hypo. Let’s assume that Player X is a left-handed LF with career .360 OBP/.465 SLG vs. righties, but only .300 OBP/.350 SLG vs. lefties. Let’s assume the team has a decent right-handed platoon mate and tries to keep Player X from hitting lefties as much as possible, so it’s about as pure a platoon as you can get. Let’s also assume that Player X is a solid defender, at least as good with the glove as the platoon mate and other LF options the team has.
Roughly how often does Player X still end up hitting lefties, due to situations where it isn’t worth taking him out yet?
The reason I ask the question above is that sometimes when we think about platoons we imagine them as being Platoon Mate 1′s stats vs. Left + Platoon Mate 2′s stats vs. Right, when the actual results aren’t going to be that good, due to the AB where the players are facing pitchers of their worse arm orientation..
Oriole fan here. Great article – what is your opinion of a Pie/Reimold platoon in LF for the O’s?
Those guys are stars? #loweringthebar
#usinghashtagtomakeajoke
#meta
A Scott Hairston signing would have fit in much better and for the same price.