SB Nation MLB Players Of The Decade
Feb 14, 2011 - Over the coming weeks, Rob Neyer is predicting who will be the best players of this decade at each position. You can view all his previous selections here as he makes them.
Mike Moustakas is a brilliant prospect, but he hasn’t played an inning in the majors and he’s probably not going to spend a lot more years at third base, considering that he’s six feet tall and weighs around 230 pounds.
I bring up Moustakas because a) he’s a brilliant prospect, and b) he’s the only brilliant third-base prospect we’ve got right now. And I bring that up because I’m trying to figure out who’s going to be the best third baseman in this decade (2010-2019).
Moustakas is just too young. Adrian Beltre, Scott Rolen and (yes) even Alex Rodriguez are just too old.
Which leaves only two candidates worth wasting any more of your time on: Ryan Zimmerman and Evan Longoria. Taking them in reverse-alphabetical order ...
Zimmerman’s better than you think. Well, maybe not better than you think. You’re really smart. But he’s better than a lot of people think. Depending on how you look at these things, Zimmerman might reasonably be rated as one of the 10 best players in the National League over the last two seasons. He hits for average and power, he draws walks, and he plays sterling defense. He turned 26 last season, and might well have his best years ahead of him. I believe Ryan Zimmerman’s got a pretty good shot at the Hall of Fame someday.
He's no Evan Longoria.
Looking just at those last two seasons, which favors Zimmerman because he wasn’t outstanding before 2009, here’s what we get ...
Zimmerman: 10.5 WAR
Longoria: 14.3 WAR
In fact, Longoria trails only Albert Pujols in Wins Above Replacement over the last two seasons.*
* I’ll bet if I give you 10 guesses, you won’t be able to guess who’s No. 3 on the list (at least according to Baseball-Reference.com). And I’m not going to tell you, because it’ll come up later when we look at outfielders.
Granted, Longoria plummets to fifth on the list if we look at the last three seasons ... but Zimmerman drops to 32nd ... and the kicker, of course, is that Longoria’s one year younger than Zimmerman.
That’s actually pretty important, because their performances – over the last two years, anyway – might be closer than it seems. Their lines are almost indentical: .288/.368/.516 for Longoria, .299/.375/.518 for Zimmerman. Sure, Longoria’s probably been facing slightly tougher pitching. Still.
No, the WAR difference here is due to defense, which seems odd because Zimmernan is a good fielder. Perhaps an outstanding fielder. According to Baseball-Reference.com, he’s just decent. But according to FanGraphs – whose defensive metrics I trust somewhat more – he’s been fantastic almost every year.
In fact, according to FanGraphs, Zimmerman’s defense actually made him a slightly better overall player than Longoria in 2010, and almost exactly equal in 2009-2010 combined.
If they were the same age, this would be really tough. Or if the leagues were switched. But Longoria’s been in the tougher league and he’s younger enough that it matters. In the end, there’s only real choice here and it’s the one you probably made when you saw the headline. Keep an eye on the other guy, though. Because if there's an opening at the top, he'll pounce.
Comments
Pedro Alvarez
Rob -
Not even a mention of young Alvarez? Care to elaborate?
by rodg12 on Feb 14, 2011 10:32 AM EST reply actions
Conventional wisdom is that he won't stick at 3B
by ken on Feb 14, 2011 11:01 AM EST up reply actions
David Wright...
Should at least be mentioned. I don’t know if he’s better than the two mentioned, but his name deserves to be put in there with them. He’s only a year older than Zimmerman, also. Don’t forget that he was a 7 WAR player (B-Ref) in his age 24 season, just like Longoria.
by Alex Kramer on Feb 14, 2011 10:32 AM EST reply actions
Wright
He should be mentioned. The rating period will be his age 28-36 seasons, and he’s coming off yet another fine season. He used to be beloved by the sabermetric community and in NYC, yet somehow he seems to have fallen off a cliff because of one bad season in 2009.
I’ll take him on my team.
by LordD99 on Feb 15, 2011 2:56 AM EST up reply actions
Better League? Horse hockey
Here is the list of the top 35 pitchers in the Majors that Ryan Zimmerman had to face last year against a division rival:
Roy Halladay (2nd)
Josh Johnson (4th)
Roy Oswalt (16th)
Anibal Sanchez (23rd)
Tommy Hanson (24th)
Cole Hamels (34th)
And here’s the list of similar pitchers that Longoria faced:
Jon Lester (10th)
CC Sabathia (13th)
Ricky Romero (28th)
John Lackey (31st)
This is a pretty comparable list — if you throw out Halladay and Johnson on the NL East side! Seriously, it’s not even close: Zimmerman has to face TOUGHER pitching on a day-to-day basis than Longoria.
Rob
"Valentines day is really the day pitchers and catchers report, and those are truly words of love.." -- David Huzzard
by RobBobS on Feb 14, 2011 10:33 AM EST reply actions 1 recs
Good get, man.
Conspicuously, none of those fine division rival pitchers were on the Metropolitans.
John Carlson: A real American hero taking names and settling scores.
Souldrummer: A regular guy trying to join Adam Dunn, Jordan Zimmermann, and Garrett Mock as one of RobBobS' guys.
by souldrummer on Feb 14, 2011 10:35 AM EST up reply actions
I should have mentioned,
these are rankings based on FanGraph’s WAR for 2010.
Rob
"Valentines day is really the day pitchers and catchers report, and those are truly words of love.." -- David Huzzard
by RobBobS on Feb 14, 2011 10:45 AM EST up reply actions
How mnay of their at bats come against these guys specifically? I’d guess not a very substantial portion. Depth of talent being the issue, not top end.
Tomahawknation.com
by SWFLNole. on Feb 14, 2011 11:40 AM EST up reply actions
Let's put it this way,
As a batter, I’d rather face the Yankees/Sox/Jays/Orioles than the Phillies/Braves/Marlins/Mets.
Zimmerman faced Halladay 7 times, Johnson 9 times, Oswalt 11 times, Sanchez 12 times, Hanson 6 times, and Hamels 6 times. That’s 51 plate appearances (8.5%) against some of the game’s best pitching just from the NL East. I would call that substantial.
Rob
"Valentines day is really the day pitchers and catchers report, and those are truly words of love.." -- David Huzzard
by RobBobS on Feb 14, 2011 12:40 PM EST up reply actions
Better league? Yes.
Just because the NL may have more higher end talent doesn’t mean the overall league is better.
Longoria played in 97 games against teams with a winning percentage over 500 (.302/.371/.507). Zimmerman played in “only” 66 (.290/.354/.478).
Top to bottom, the AL east is the toughest division in baseball. Even if they don’t necessarily have the best individual players.
by stophittingyourself on Feb 14, 2011 6:56 PM EST up reply actions
The teams may be better --
I don’t particularly care to argue that point. I am just saying the PITCHING is better in the NL East.
Rob
"Valentines day is really the day pitchers and catchers report, and those are truly words of love.." -- David Huzzard
by RobBobS on Feb 15, 2011 1:40 AM EST up reply actions
You forgot to mention Clay Buchholtz, Josh Beckett, and Phil Hughes that Longoria has to face. I’d say that Longo faces tougher pitching within the division, let alone the rest of the league.
by tellrodt on Feb 14, 2011 11:12 PM EST up reply actions
None of them made the top 35 in WAR,
which was my somewhat arbitrary cutoff.
But since you brought it up, I also didn’t mention Santana, Pelfrey, Dickey, and Lowe — all of whom had better WAR’s than Hughes or Beckett.
Rob
"Valentines day is really the day pitchers and catchers report, and those are truly words of love.." -- David Huzzard
by RobBobS on Feb 15, 2011 1:39 AM EST up reply actions
I won't knock Halladay
…but Lester and Sabathia would blow the doors off the rest (including Johnson) if they pitched in the NL. Period.
by LordD99 on Feb 15, 2011 2:58 AM EST up reply actions
Josh Johnson vs. AL East
63 IP, 19 ER (2.71 ERA), 7.4 K/9
Still a small sample, but it doesn’t seem like he’s had an extraordinary problem with these teams so far…
Rob
"Valentines day is really the day pitchers and catchers report, and those are truly words of love.." -- David Huzzard
by RobBobS on Feb 15, 2011 10:46 AM EST up reply actions
One could argue
they have a higher WAR because they faced lesser competition…
check out VEB on facebook...just search groups for Viva El Birdos
by Dttl89 on Feb 15, 2011 3:06 AM EST up reply actions
Nope
WAR accounts for that. Notice that an AL pitcher with a higher FIP/fewer innings compared to an NL picher with a lower FIP/more innings can still have a higher cumulative WAR.
Rocktober is not a time of year, it is a religion.
by hjrrockies on Feb 15, 2011 1:30 PM EST up reply actions
See:
Adam Wainwright vs. Justin Verlander
Rocktober is not a time of year, it is a religion.
by hjrrockies on Feb 15, 2011 1:32 PM EST up reply actions
Thank you for posting this
I have been saying this for years. All I have ever seen is anecdotal evidence for the AL-NL disparity, and yet somehow it is commonly accepted as fact.
However, of Rob Neyer has some evidence to the contrary, I would love to hear it as I do respect his opinion. I just have never seen the actual evidence.
by Andy Braves Fan on Feb 15, 2011 2:28 PM EST up reply actions
And to be clear
I agree with Rob that Longoria is better, but I think the pitching disparity argument is perpetually overblown.
by Andy Braves Fan on Feb 15, 2011 2:53 PM EST up reply actions
Yeah, I get it as a Nationals fan
Of course, it would certainly help if Zimmerman was on a team where he had more RBI opportunities and guys on base to help give him more at bats in meaningful opportunities. If I remember correctly, Zimmerman’s usually had early season slumps and he had one right before the all-star break last year.
Longoria is certainly the choice, but I’m certainly rooting for Zim to pounce.
John Carlson: A real American hero taking names and settling scores.
Souldrummer: A regular guy trying to join Adam Dunn, Jordan Zimmermann, and Garrett Mock as one of RobBobS' guys.
by souldrummer on Feb 14, 2011 10:33 AM EST reply actions
3rd Highest War
Hey Rob, I’ve read your columns a lot, never really made a comment until now, because I think I can take a random shot in the dark and say I think i know who it is.
I believe it is Shin-Soo Choo. A player who largely gets dismissed for being on the Indians, but I have a good friend who is an Indians fan so I hear about him.
by Jordan12 on Feb 14, 2011 10:33 AM EST reply actions
Choo it is.
"Spring Training wins are good for the soul."
by USSChoo on Feb 14, 2011 3:48 PM EST up reply actions
Kevin Youkilis
Youkilis might be a bit too old, but he at least deserved to be mentioned now that he will be full-time at 3rd.
by Nappa0407 on Feb 14, 2011 10:35 AM EST reply actions
david wright
Wright is less than three years older than Longoria, less than two years older than Zimmerman. His two best years (8.6 fWAR, 7.6 fWAR) came not too long ago (‘07, ’08) and those two years beat both Longoria and Zimmerman’s best two years to-date.
Now, Wright would be in his age-37 season in 2020, Zimmerman in his age-35 season, Longoria in his age-34 season, so they do have the age-curve on their side. Also, Wright’s seen his production decline sharply since his apex a couple years ago. But again, Wright just turned 29. Who says he can’t bounce back to being an elite 3B again? And who says Longoria and Zimmerman don’t experience a decline much like Wright did?
I’d still give Longoria and Zimmerman the edge because of age and production curve but I don’t think we should completely omit Wright from the conversation. Again, his peak was greater than anything Longo/Zimm have done to-date and he’s entering his age-29 season. We all know how fickle defensive metrics can be (they had Wright as an borderline elite defender in ‘07-’08). If he can convince those metrics to swing back the other way, even with all his strikeouts, Wright is even-Steven with those guys in 2011.
by Paul Bourdett on Feb 14, 2011 10:36 AM EST reply actions
David Wright
If I were a betting man I’d take the field. Always take the field. But if the field were not an option I’d put Wright 2nd behind Longoria. Wright was better younger than Zimmerman and his outstanding years are too recent to dismiss.
by moviegoer74 on Feb 14, 2011 10:38 AM EST reply actions
"deserved to be mentioned"
Stop your whining. Why does someone who won’t win “deserve to be mentioned”?
Pedro Alvarez? C’mon.
by Boozer10 on Feb 14, 2011 10:52 AM EST reply actions
We don’t know who will be the best, that’s why people deserve to be mentioned.
by Alex Kramer on Feb 14, 2011 11:44 AM EST up reply actions
No. 3
I get 10 guesses? Okay, how about:
Carl Crawford
Ryan Braun
Matt Holliday
Jayson Werth
Ichiro Suzuki
Well, that’s five. Jordan12’s guess of Choo is a good one, too.
by GBSimons on Feb 14, 2011 11:06 AM EST reply actions
Ichiro's probably a bit old now.
He’s in amazing shape, but I don’t think he’s got a decade left.
"People don't kill people. Burning oreo packages kill people."
by crolfer on Feb 14, 2011 11:22 AM EST up reply actions
Question about your usage of Baseball-Reference WAR
In this post — and the rest of your players of the decade posts — you cite WAR from Baseball-Reference (or rWAR, as it sometimes referred to). If you like Fangraphs’ defensive metrics more, why don’t you use their WAR valuations instead?
Roto Hardball | @CajoleJuice
by CajoleJuice on Feb 14, 2011 11:21 AM EST reply actions
I do this too
…when discussing WAR.
I am a fan of UZR, but I think Fangraphs emphasizes defense too much. Truth is, defense is still really difficult to quantify. We all know that one year of data isn’t enough to really tell us much about someone’s defensive ability, yet defense makes up a huge portion of fWAR. Players can have major swings in their fWAR due to brilliant defensive years that simply aren’t indicative of true talent. This doesn’t happen as much with rWAR.
Take Alfonso Soriano, for instance. At his best, he was a fine player. He had some really good years in NY. His one year in Washington was good, as well. From 2002-2006 he averaged 3.4 rWAR (3.9fWAR). In 2007, he was brilliant in the field. He played the outfield and posted 31.6 UZR (!), 16 DRS, and 9 TZ. His fWAR jumped to 6.9 (1.5 wins more than he’d ever had, previously). His rWAR was very good (3.6), but was only good enough for his fourth best season.
I like UZR, but I prefer rWAR.
Maybe Rob used it for this reason.
by stophittingyourself on Feb 14, 2011 7:11 PM EST up reply actions
You can't "overemphasize" defense
UZR is measured in runs, same as batting runs created. Either UZR is right, and is a valid component of fWAR, or it is wrong, and is not a valid component of fWAR. You can’t say you like UZR, but then say you don’t like the results it gives you.
If a player has a brilliant defensive year (above their “talent level”), shouldn’t WAR show that? Defense slumps, just like hitting, and it has peaks as well. Soriano was more valuable in 2007 (if you believe UZR), even if he was “playing over his head.” Should we knock a few of Jose Bautista’s home runs off because it wasn’t his “true talent level?”
Rocktober is not a time of year, it is a religion.
by hjrrockies on Feb 14, 2011 9:02 PM EST up reply actions
That doesn't make sense
How is it not possible to overrate something? o.O
My problem with fWAR is that it is subject to wild swings in UZR, which in turn is subject to the vagaries of small sample size.
If you’re measuring someone’s defense, it is best to look at least three years of data, correct? Yet people cite one year’s WAR all the time. fWAR strongly emphasizes defense, yet it is only using one season’s worth of data. That makes it unreliable.
Not that it should be thrown out altogether, but I think it’s sensible to more skeptical of seasons which fall outside of expectations. I think it’s more likely for a 4 WAR player to post a 7 fWAR season than a 7rWAR season.
“If a player has a brilliant defensive year (above their "talent level"), shouldn’t WAR show that?”
Sure. But how much should we trust that?
Not much, in my opinion. Weight is given (by advanced metrics) to all sorts of things. Why not try to weigh for statistical variation in small sample sizes?
“Defense slumps, just like hitting, and it has peaks as well. Soriano was more valuable in 2007 (if you believe UZR), even if he was "playing over his head." Should we knock a few of Jose Bautista’s home runs off because it wasn’t his "true talent level?"”
Should we stop accounting for luck when a pitcher has an ERA of 2.30 but a FIP of .3.70?
by stophittingyourself on Feb 14, 2011 9:29 PM EST up reply actions
Why shouldn't we trust UZR?
“Weight” is empirically verified. You don’t assign arbitrary weight to defensive metrics, you determine what the weights are by looking at past data.
I’m not sure what you mean by “weigh for statistical variation in small sample sizes.” If you mean to “level out” the peaks and valleys, then you are still missing the point. The point is that, even in small sample sizes, plays are made that prevent a certain number of runs from scoring. It’s that simple. UZR is just measuring that: how many runs above average were saved by fielders.
In a small sample size, you can’t determine true-talent level, but that doesn’t mean that the sample is meaningless.
For example, let’s say “Player A” hit at a .400 wOBA rate for about 50 plate appearances. That’s equivalent to about 5 batting RAR. It’s a small sample size, so we don’t know if this player’s true talent level is a .400 wOBA. However, we do know that he contributed those 5 batting RAR – small sample sizes don’t diminish cumulative contributions.
To give a similar example for fielding, let’s say “Player B” fielded at a rate of 15 UZR/150 games for 100 games/900 innings. That’s equivalent to about 10 fielding runs. It’s a small sample size, so we don’t know if this player’s true talent level is at 15 UZR/150. However, we do know that he contributed those 10 fielding runs – small sample sizes don’t diminish cumulative contributions.
To sum up: Don’t confuse “true talent level” with actual performance, even in small sample sizes. It’s unlikely that Players A and B are actually at .400 wOBA/15 UZR/150 talent levels. But they did play at that level over a small sample size, and they receive the credit for it.
Could you explain what you mean by your FIP/ERA/“Luck” example?
Rocktober is not a time of year, it is a religion.
by hjrrockies on Feb 15, 2011 1:26 PM EST up reply actions
I have a reason
UZR classified Mark Teixeiira and Robinson Cano as bad defenders. They are amomg the elite in their position
by jjdel8895 on Feb 15, 2011 1:30 PM EST up reply actions
You can like UZR as a metric, but disagree with how it values those runs relative to batting runs. If you think the math makes it give to much value to defense and skew the numbers without UZR as a tool for comparison being compromised. It’s all about frame of reference.
Et tu, Ribe?
by Solidarity on Feb 15, 2011 2:13 AM EST up reply actions
It's not really about reference frame though
Runs are runs are runs are runs. A batting run is the same as a fielding run, except in how they are contributed.
UZR is looking at every play and crediting/debiting the fielder with a percentage of the run value that corresponds with the average result of that play. Make a play that saves an average of .7 runs (above an average fielder)? Get credited for that run value. It’s not like they arbitrarily assign run values, they are empirically determined.
Rocktober is not a time of year, it is a religion.
by hjrrockies on Feb 15, 2011 1:10 PM EST up reply actions
You’re missing my point. You can like UZR as a tool for comparison – player A is a superior defender to player B – but not like how it attributes value in a “big picture” sense.
I like UZR, but I accept that it is far from perfect. It is a tool, not an objective fact. Just like WAR is not a tool, and a be-all and end-all. That it is so widely supported speaks to the empirical foundation, but it is ultimately something that has been contrived to measure something that is otherwise very difficult to quantify. It doesn’t have to be perfect to be a massive improvement.
Et tu, Ribe?
by Solidarity on Feb 17, 2011 7:32 AM EST up reply actions
No, I understand what you are saying
Let me ask you this: Why don’t you like how it attributes value? Do you think that it assigns too many runs to defense?
Rocktober is not a time of year, it is a religion.
by hjrrockies on Feb 17, 2011 11:12 AM EST up reply actions
I don’t take particular issue with UZR, but it has enough working parts for me to recognize that there is room for debate as the values in the final derivation. I talk to plenty of people who really like UZR and routinely use it to compare players, but take its contributions to fWAR when looking at, say, Andres Torres or Brett Gardner. Or, we look to places where UZR might not handle the data perfectly, like Jason Bay’s stats after manning left field in Fenway, or the seemingly deflated defensive values for outfielders at Coors Field.
Looking at these problem cases and welcoming debate for them can only serve to further the effort at accurately quantifying defense, and so I have no problem with critiquing the finer points of how we determine value. With enough eyes, all bugs are shallow.
Generally speaking, I trust fWAR in most cases, but think there are enough wonky bits that it warrants closer inspection in some cases.
Et tu, Ribe?
by Solidarity on Feb 17, 2011 5:03 PM EST up reply actions
I can say amen to that
Rocktober is not a time of year, it is a religion.
by hjrrockies on Feb 18, 2011 10:27 AM EST up reply actions
I am sorry.
But David Wright’s age and his recent history simply exclude him from this conversation, as a serious candidate. And I say that as a big fan.
Jordan nailed it (regarding No. 3). More on that next week.
I’ll try to transition to fWar. Baseball-Reference’s stuff is easier to sort, especially the multi-year stuff. But I should just suck it up and do stuff by hand if necessary.
by Rob Neyer on Feb 14, 2011 11:23 AM EST reply actions
Last year you would have had more of a case with regards to Fangraphs
But they’ve added so many options to their leaderboards this offseason. I’m still loving the series.
And as a Mets fan, it’s sad to see both Reyes and Wright not mentioned, but the past two years have just been so disheartening that it’s hard not to think their best years are behind them.
Roto Hardball | @CajoleJuice
by CajoleJuice on Feb 14, 2011 11:35 AM EST up reply actions
Rob, if you exclude Wright, you have to exclude Zimmerman
Zim is only two years younger than Wright:

That isn’t a lifetime. Yes, Wright had a drop in 2009-2010, but his power returned last year and with better offensive pieces around him he as a chance to get back that 6-8 WAR territory. Zim also had a Wright-like dip his 4th season and rebounded nicely to his two 6+ WAR seasons. What’s killing Wright is his defense, which really regressed the last two years.
In the end, it is likely going to be Longoria, but I don’t think you can just chuck Wright from the conversation.
Also, Longoria and Zim are only .3 WAR apart the last two seasons if you go by FanGraphs.
Writer at Beyond the Box Score and tortured Mets fan (is there any other kind?)
by Bill Petti on Feb 14, 2011 3:42 PM EST up reply actions
Well, at some point, you have to if Longoria is the choice.
I agree with Rob. There are significant signs that Wright isn’t the same player anymore.
1. His K% is WAY up from his MVP-caliber days: 27% now. Way too high to hit for a great average anymore.
2. His BB% was down last year.
3. His LD% was way down to 18% compared to his 24% of 2007-2009
4. He is chasing pitches at a career high rate, he is making contact at a career low rate, and swinging and missing at a career high rate.
5. He has posted back-to-back -10 UZR run seasons.
Don’t get me wrong, he is a very good player, and still has All-Star ability, but he doesn’t fit in with Longoria and Zimmerman anymore.
Rocktober is not a time of year, it is a religion.
by hjrrockies on Feb 14, 2011 9:09 PM EST up reply actions
fWAR vs rWAR
Question: one year of defensive data isn’t a large enough sample to determine how good someone is in the field, yet Fangraphs emphasizes defensive value more than Baseball-reference. This can cause wildly anomalous individual WAR seasons for players based on crazy defensive numbers. Doesn’t this make fWAR a little less reliable than rWAR (even if UZR is more reliable than Sean Smith’s defensive metrics)?
I cited Alfonso Soriano’s 2007 season in a previous reply, here. That’s the only example I can think of off hand, but I know there are others. Ben Zobrist in 2009, maybe? 8.4 fWAR compared to 7.1 rWAR; a difference based largely on a UZR spike.
I like UZR, overall. But I don’t like fWAR for this reason. I think it’s good 98% of the time, but I think rWAR is more reliable because the peaks and valleys aren’t as pronounced.
by stophittingyourself on Feb 14, 2011 7:23 PM EST up reply actions
I asked a similar question re: Carlos Gonzalez and UZR
What I was told is that single-season UZR is indicative of actual defensive value, within the season. You would prefer more innings than one season contains to get a sense of true-talent level (as with any statistic).
As I mentioned above, those peaks and valleys are real. They happened. They may seem to be outliers, but that’s because players don’t play at the same level every year.
Rocktober is not a time of year, it is a religion.
by hjrrockies on Feb 14, 2011 9:17 PM EST up reply actions
Sure they are real.
Just as a guy may have a really good month in which he goes .387/.436/.590. But that month doesn’t necessarily mean he’ll hit .300/.400/.500 for the season.
Soriano may have been great in 2007, in the field. But I don’t buy that he was worth 7 runs in 2007 and “only” 5.4 the year before. Offensively, he was better in 2006 (.377 wOBA, 135 OPS+, 4.1 oWAR) than he was in 2007 (.380 wOBA, 122 OPS+, 2.5 oWAR). Using only Fangraphs, he was worth 32 runs with the bat in 2006 and 22 in 2007. But he was worth 7 runs in the field in 2006 and 33 (!) in 2007. Really? Such a huge discrepancy doesn’t raise any alarms?
I agree that it’s possible he was just drastically better in one season, and that he may have never played that well again. It happens. Roger Maris was great in 1960/61, and never really approached that level again. Zoilo Versalles played spectacularly well in 1965, and never approached that level again.
But when Fangraphs and B-R are so far apart in terms of WAR, I’ll err on the side of B-R simply because there are limitations on quantifying defense (especially considering small sample sizes). Fangraphs emphasizes it so much, but the foundations simply isn’t that strong.
Which is why I use rWAR, even if I support UZR, generally.
by stophittingyourself on Feb 14, 2011 9:45 PM EST up reply actions
Fangraphs addressed this issue
It doesn’t actually weigh defense more than Baseball-Reference:
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/how-much-is-fielding-weighted-in-war/
Roto Hardball | @CajoleJuice
by CajoleJuice on Feb 14, 2011 11:29 PM EST up reply actions
Excellent
I just learned something new. Thank you.
That kind of throws out my whole argument.
by stophittingyourself on Feb 14, 2011 11:52 PM EST up reply actions
I probably should have just linked that first...
BTW – I hope I don’t come across as contrary or contentious. I thought the same thing about UZR just 3 weeks ago, but (much) smarter people than me clarified my concerns.
Rocktober is not a time of year, it is a religion.
by hjrrockies on Feb 15, 2011 1:28 PM EST up reply actions
Another name...
As others have said, Wright probably certainly deserves an HM here. He’s only a year older than Zimmerman and still has a chance to rebound. It’s not like he was awful last year.
The other name I think is worth considering is Anthony Rendon at Rice. Assuming he’s recovered from his ankle injury last summer, there’s a pretty good chance he’ll be the #1 overall pick in the draft and be the Pirates’ starting 3B by June ‘13 (even more reason to discount Alvarez). Considering that he’ll turn 30 in 2020, things line up pretty nicely for him to work his way into the discussion.
Obviously there’s no way you take Rendon over Longoria right now, but he should probably be in the top 5 already (clearly behind Longo and Zim, maybe a hair behind Wright and Moustakas), with a chance to move up the list very quickly over the next 18 months.
by Geoff Silver on Feb 14, 2011 11:35 AM EST reply actions
College Superstar.
Rendon would have been worth a mention, I suppose. But we would have said exactly the same things about Alex Gordon, right? I just don’t have much use for players who haven’t faced professional pitching yet.
by Rob Neyer on Feb 14, 2011 11:48 AM EST reply actions
"I just don’t have much use for players who haven’t faced professional pitching yet"
Tell that to the Bryce Harper boosters.
Please!
Jonathan Singleton is a better prospect at this point but baseball forums are full of posters who have Harper as an All-Star for the Nats next year. These people need to take Seroquel.
by Free_AEC on Feb 16, 2011 1:32 PM EST up reply actions
Martin Prado
Will be the ATL Braves 3B once Chipper retires. He will be a multiple MVP candidate.
by atlbravosfan on Feb 14, 2011 5:59 PM EST reply actions
ha ha
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Feb 14, 2011 6:51 PM EST up reply actions
Nope
Not enough power, doesn’t walk enough to post a high OBP. He’s well above average, but he’s nowhere close to Longoria/Zimmerman
Rocktober is not a time of year, it is a religion.
by hjrrockies on Feb 14, 2011 9:10 PM EST up reply actions
Are we off the Pablo Sandoval train already?
His sophomore season was dismal, but he’s got a nice chance of a rebound and his 2009/half of 2008 were pretty off the charts. I think he rates at least an also-ran mention.
/blatant homerism
It's Johnnie Walker inside.
by Lies and Perfidy on Feb 14, 2011 6:22 PM EST reply actions
Much as I love Pablo, I can’t see him as being part of this discussion until his defense improves. If it doesn’t, he probably won’t be playing third base in 2020… Which would exclude him from consideration, for obvious reasons.
Et tu, Ribe?
by Solidarity on Feb 15, 2011 2:17 AM EST up reply actions
Don't use Baseball Reference WAR when comparing current players
So why use B-R WAR, then ?
You’re not the only one who trusts UZR more than TZ – the guy who invented Total Zone does too ! Sean Smith has said that UZR is the best system out there for measuring defense. I particularly like this quote, talking about comparing TZ and UZR results:
“When the infielders are off, I assume that it’s just the error of an imprecise system and that UZR has the right value”
Ok, it’s definately off in Zimmerman’s case. Other advanced fielding metrics (UZR, DRS) and subjective opinions (Fielding Bible, Fans Scouting report) consider him not merely good, nor very good, but elite defensively.
Baseball Reference WAR considers him right around replacement level defensively. That’s crazy.
by ReplacementLevel on Feb 14, 2011 8:45 PM EST reply actions
I picked "someone else from the field"
That’s just a gut feeling. Third baseman, as a general rule, don’t seem to age well—at least as third baseman. For some reason, it seems like more of them fall off a cliff by age 30. Third baseman who continue to hit but lose a bit of quickness or speed tend to be moved to 1st base. And sometimes 2d basemen and shortstops are moved to 3d base as their defense declines a somewhat. I’ll vote for an unknown young third baseman who can reach star power around 2013 or so.
by clack on Feb 15, 2011 2:06 PM EST reply actions
As a Mets fan, Wright is my favorite player. Still, as much as I love watching him play, the strikeouts over the last 2 seasons and shotty defense (by metrics standards) are a bit concerning. As long as Wright is striking out at a clip of ~25% or more, hes probably not going to return to the elite hitter he was in 2006-2008. I have a little more faith his defense will rebound, but probably not enough to get him back to the kind of value years he was putting up prior to 2009.
I went with Longoria.
by nmigliore on Feb 21, 2011 2:09 PM EST reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed