When I was filling out my All-Star ballot, there was one player for whom I voted (on several of my roughly 100 ballots) who did not make the team at all; indeed, his name was hardly spoken, as if he were Valdemort.
He's exactly the kind of player who falls through the cracks, or at least used to, before we realized that batting average, home runs and RBI are simply the outline, leaving out all the colors inside the lines.
He hits doubles and triples, plays excellent defense, earns his share of walks, employs his speed judiciously, doesn't make a lot of noise and plays for a last-place team in a second-tier market.
Since he became a regular in 2011, he's hit .296/.354/.431, stolen an average of 15 of 19 bases and played above-average defense in left and center field. He's also improved over that time, to the point that he hit over .300 with 20 home runs last season. His OPS is 20% better than average and he's earned 3.5 WAR/year with a third of this season remaining.
You get 23 guesses (that's his number) and you still won't name him: Indians outfielder Michael Brantley, who is batting .313 this year and leading the AL in doubles. He's swiped 12 of 13 bases and played 101 of the team's 110 games. Brantley's True Average ranks fifth among AL left-fielders, which means 10 other teams would love to employ him.
Tribe brass know what they have. They signed Brantley to a four-year, $33 million contract that buys out his arbitration years and one season of free agency. And if Cleveland can get a bullpen, a third baseman and a center fielder, Brantley might have enough pieces around him to capture some All-Star votes.
Showing posts with label most under-rated. Show all posts
Showing posts with label most under-rated. Show all posts
12 August 2015
29 July 2013
A Kick In the Shin: The Most Under-rated Player in Baseball
He's a leadoff hitter with a .417 OBP (second in the NL) and plenty of pop too -- 14 homers and 26 doubles/triples. His OPS of .883 is 40% better than average and 10th best in the league. He gets on base even more often -- half the time -- in high leverage situations, like late in close games.
He's worth four wins to his team at the plate, fifth in the league, and staffs the critical center field position. Not surprisingly, he's third in the league in runs scored, thanks also to a great number three hitter and good cleanup guy.
He's no flash-in-the-pan either: during his nine year career, he's hit .289/.387/.465, 33% above average.
And yet, he wasn't even seriously considered for the All-Star team and isn't on anyone's MVP preview list. You probably don't know anything about him. Shin-soo Choo may be the most under-rated player in Major League Baseball.
It may be that the low-key Korean native has suffered an identity crisis from playing in Cleveland and Cincinnati, two Ohio cities with small Korean populations. It could be that his skills don't light up the BA-HR-RBI stat meter that uneducated baseball fans still use. It could be that teammates like superstar Joey Votto and flashy Brandon Phillips have overshadowed him.
Whatever the reason, Choo would have to be on your short list of MVP candidates so far, along with Votto, David Wright, Buster Posey, Carlos Gonzalez, Andrew McCutcheon, Matt Carpenter, Yadier Molina and Carlos Gomez.
It's worth noting that nowhere near that list is Phillips, the walking highlight reel powered by joie de vivre and accompanied by a decent stick. But the suggestion by an MLB-employed "analyst" (who shall remain nameless to spare him further embarrassment) that Phillips is the NL MVP so far because of his league-leading RBI total is so utterly out-of-touch that he should be relieved of duties based on that one statement alone. (Ironically, the offending analyst was a reliever when he played ball.)
Phillips led the league in RBIs -- he doesn't anymore -- because Choo and Votto occupy the basepaths before him. Phillips himself is hitting just .261/.313/.403, which, though highly respectable for a second baseman, is below average overall. Not only does he enjoy the most RBI opportunities in the league by a wide margin, he also benefits disproportionately from runners in scoring position. Phillips is a laudable sixth in the league in converting those opportunities, but that's hardly MVP material. He's been worth about a win-and-a-half to the Reds, small potatoes compared to Choo.
It's tempting determine player value by this method:
1. Find an everyday performer on a good team with a high batting average and big home run totals
2. Season with steals and fielding
3. Factor in his position.
That would make us feel like we'd covered the bases. You're likely to find a good player that way, but our tools are so much more refined and thoughtful, and easily available. They help us determine that a quiet guy like Shin-soo Choo is far more valuable than his tweeting, fun-king teammate, Brandon Phillips.
He's worth four wins to his team at the plate, fifth in the league, and staffs the critical center field position. Not surprisingly, he's third in the league in runs scored, thanks also to a great number three hitter and good cleanup guy.
And yet, he wasn't even seriously considered for the All-Star team and isn't on anyone's MVP preview list. You probably don't know anything about him. Shin-soo Choo may be the most under-rated player in Major League Baseball.
It may be that the low-key Korean native has suffered an identity crisis from playing in Cleveland and Cincinnati, two Ohio cities with small Korean populations. It could be that his skills don't light up the BA-HR-RBI stat meter that uneducated baseball fans still use. It could be that teammates like superstar Joey Votto and flashy Brandon Phillips have overshadowed him.
Whatever the reason, Choo would have to be on your short list of MVP candidates so far, along with Votto, David Wright, Buster Posey, Carlos Gonzalez, Andrew McCutcheon, Matt Carpenter, Yadier Molina and Carlos Gomez.
It's worth noting that nowhere near that list is Phillips, the walking highlight reel powered by joie de vivre and accompanied by a decent stick. But the suggestion by an MLB-employed "analyst" (who shall remain nameless to spare him further embarrassment) that Phillips is the NL MVP so far because of his league-leading RBI total is so utterly out-of-touch that he should be relieved of duties based on that one statement alone. (Ironically, the offending analyst was a reliever when he played ball.)
Phillips led the league in RBIs -- he doesn't anymore -- because Choo and Votto occupy the basepaths before him. Phillips himself is hitting just .261/.313/.403, which, though highly respectable for a second baseman, is below average overall. Not only does he enjoy the most RBI opportunities in the league by a wide margin, he also benefits disproportionately from runners in scoring position. Phillips is a laudable sixth in the league in converting those opportunities, but that's hardly MVP material. He's been worth about a win-and-a-half to the Reds, small potatoes compared to Choo.
It's tempting determine player value by this method:
1. Find an everyday performer on a good team with a high batting average and big home run totals
2. Season with steals and fielding
3. Factor in his position.
That would make us feel like we'd covered the bases. You're likely to find a good player that way, but our tools are so much more refined and thoughtful, and easily available. They help us determine that a quiet guy like Shin-soo Choo is far more valuable than his tweeting, fun-king teammate, Brandon Phillips.
27 December 2009
The Most Under-Rated Player In Modern History
It's hard to believe that any player in baseball could be over- or under-rated. Most activities on the field involve one player per team at a time and are measured down to the individual nose hair by the Elias Sports Bureau, whose count is duly recorded for posterity by 73 websites staffed by megageeks who atomize the information and subject it all to regression analysis.
Nonetheless, as long as willfully ignorant sportswriters and sportscasters dominate the debate -- and the Hall of Fame vote -- the wrong measurements will remain valued over those that provide a broader, fuller and more accurate picture of player accomplishments.
The profile of an under-rated player is predictable: Sports media over-rates batting average as opposed to on-base percentage, home runs as opposed to double and triples, RBIs as opposed to runs scored, offense as opposed to defense (except in extraordinary situations), steals as opposed to base stealing percentage, accomplishments in an accommodating ballpark (except in extraordinary situations), being prodigious in a particular facet of the game as opposed to demonstrating broad-based excellence, and maybe most of all, playing on a winning team. In addition, players whose teammates propel them into spotlight games -- specifically the World Series -- in which to demonstrate their transcendence, often bask in that glow.
(This, of course, applies to everyday players, not pitchers. Pitching wins is probably the single most over-rated statistic in baseball, but that's another story.)
Consequently, the quintessential under-rated player toiled for lousy teams and rarely made the playoffs. He batted in a pitchers' park most of his career, hitting lots of doubles and triples, but not a ton of homers. He was an excellent, but not flashy, fielder who stole bases at a very high rate, hit for a good but not great average while walking like a mall rat, scored a mess of runs but never knocked any in. Our particular fellow may have been the second-best lead-off hitter of all time, but played Scottie Pippen to Rickey Henderson's Michael Jordan.
This player belongs in the Hall of Fame, and not the ancillary wing with Jim Rice, Tony Perez, Phil Rizzuto, Don Drysdale, Don Sutton and Bill Mazeroski. Unfortunately, he'll never sniff Cooperstown without a ride from the Albany airport. Last year, his first year of eligibility, he tallied less than 25% of the Hall vote. It might be his high-water mark.
He's Tim Raines, and he's the most under-rated player of my lifetime. Raines was a superman who could do everything well, under the worst circumstances, but we didn't notice, because we were looking at all the wrong things.
Let me quote the great Joe Posnanski, from an epistle supporting his Hall vote for Raines based on peak and lengevity.
From 1983-87 -- (his) five year peak -- he hit .318/.406/.467 for a 142 OPS+, the same OPS+ that Jim Rice had during his five-year peak. During those five years, he averaged 114 runs scored, 34 doubles, 10 triples, 11 home runs and 71 stolen bases a year. He led the league in runs scored twice, batting and on-base percentage once, doubles once, stolen bases twice, and could have won three MVP awards. He had 163 win shares in those five years -- an average of 32.6. Bill (James, the mastermind behind Win Shares) says a 30-win share season is an MVP-type year.
That's not even the half of it. Raines' lifetime slugging percentage is higher than Rickey Henderson's and two points lower than Joe Morgan's, despite playing much of his career in that hangar the Expos called home. He's fifth on the stolen base list, but first all-time in success rate (84.7%) among guys with 300 steals.
Baseball writers use an affective-cognitive-conative approach to Hall of Fame voting. First, they use the smell test: did this guy seem like a Hall of Famer. Raines did not, because we were obsessed with batting average (.294 lifetime) and home runs (130 lifetime) during his career. Then they do their due diligence, noting the mediocrity of his triple crown stats (never more than 71 RBIs in a season.) Then they move on to someone else.
On objective measuring systems, Raines is a front row Hall of Famer. On the aforementioned Win Shares scale, which attempts to determine a player's share of responsibility for team wins, he places 40th all time, ahead of the likes of Johnny Bench, Reggie Jackson, Jackie Robinson, Tony Gwynn, Cal Ripken, Yogi Berra and Paul Waner. Not too shabby.
I know, I know, you don't care about Win Shares.You don't care about OPS or stolen base percentage or any of those fancy doo-dads like VORP and BABIP. I understand. We've got a recession, two wars and nuclear weapons in Iran and North Korea to worry about, and there's no room in your head for a new understanding of how baseball really works. I get that. And that's why Tim Raines will remain under-rated and on the wrong side of the doors to the Hall of Fame.
b
(This, of course, applies to everyday players, not pitchers. Pitching wins is probably the single most over-rated statistic in baseball, but that's another story.)
Consequently, the quintessential under-rated player toiled for lousy teams and rarely made the playoffs. He batted in a pitchers' park most of his career, hitting lots of doubles and triples, but not a ton of homers. He was an excellent, but not flashy, fielder who stole bases at a very high rate, hit for a good but not great average while walking like a mall rat, scored a mess of runs but never knocked any in. Our particular fellow may have been the second-best lead-off hitter of all time, but played Scottie Pippen to Rickey Henderson's Michael Jordan.
This player belongs in the Hall of Fame, and not the ancillary wing with Jim Rice, Tony Perez, Phil Rizzuto, Don Drysdale, Don Sutton and Bill Mazeroski. Unfortunately, he'll never sniff Cooperstown without a ride from the Albany airport. Last year, his first year of eligibility, he tallied less than 25% of the Hall vote. It might be his high-water mark.
He's Tim Raines, and he's the most under-rated player of my lifetime. Raines was a superman who could do everything well, under the worst circumstances, but we didn't notice, because we were looking at all the wrong things.
Let me quote the great Joe Posnanski, from an epistle supporting his Hall vote for Raines based on peak and lengevity.
From 1983-87 -- (his) five year peak -- he hit .318/.406/.467 for a 142 OPS+, the same OPS+ that Jim Rice had during his five-year peak. During those five years, he averaged 114 runs scored, 34 doubles, 10 triples, 11 home runs and 71 stolen bases a year. He led the league in runs scored twice, batting and on-base percentage once, doubles once, stolen bases twice, and could have won three MVP awards. He had 163 win shares in those five years -- an average of 32.6. Bill (James, the mastermind behind Win Shares) says a 30-win share season is an MVP-type year.
That's not even the half of it. Raines' lifetime slugging percentage is higher than Rickey Henderson's and two points lower than Joe Morgan's, despite playing much of his career in that hangar the Expos called home. He's fifth on the stolen base list, but first all-time in success rate (84.7%) among guys with 300 steals.
Baseball writers use an affective-cognitive-conative approach to Hall of Fame voting. First, they use the smell test: did this guy seem like a Hall of Famer. Raines did not, because we were obsessed with batting average (.294 lifetime) and home runs (130 lifetime) during his career. Then they do their due diligence, noting the mediocrity of his triple crown stats (never more than 71 RBIs in a season.) Then they move on to someone else.
On objective measuring systems, Raines is a front row Hall of Famer. On the aforementioned Win Shares scale, which attempts to determine a player's share of responsibility for team wins, he places 40th all time, ahead of the likes of Johnny Bench, Reggie Jackson, Jackie Robinson, Tony Gwynn, Cal Ripken, Yogi Berra and Paul Waner. Not too shabby.
I know, I know, you don't care about Win Shares.You don't care about OPS or stolen base percentage or any of those fancy doo-dads like VORP and BABIP. I understand. We've got a recession, two wars and nuclear weapons in Iran and North Korea to worry about, and there's no room in your head for a new understanding of how baseball really works. I get that. And that's why Tim Raines will remain under-rated and on the wrong side of the doors to the Hall of Fame.
b
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)