On Trading Miguel Andujar

Rumors rule the off season and as the market heats up, they are swirling in gusty winds. Of course, rumors are just rumors until they are not. But they do get clicks don't they? The latest gust has the Yankees, Mets and Marlins involved in a three-team swap as the Mets desperately want to get J.T. Realmuto from the Marlins and the Yankees would love get a big-time pitcher and Derek Jeter wants a Major League player. The name swirling for the Yankees is Miguel Andujar.  Another piece stated that the Yankees were willing to listen to talks concerning Andujar.

Granted, we are just talking rumors here. And granted, the Yankees need pitching as we have seen time and time again that pitching wins the post season. But if there is any kernel of truth to these rumors, why Miguel Andujar? Is it his defense? Or that he does not walk enough? Or is the truth closer to the fact that the Yankees really want to sign Manny Machado? Or is it all three?

If the Yankees were to trade Andujar, they better have Machado all but locked up because Miguel Andujar was the rock of the Yankees' offense in 2018. He was consistently a presence in the lineup from when he arrived to when the season ended. He did flop in the playoffs, but so did a lot of Yankees. As good as Andujar was in the first half of the season, he was better in the second. There is no way the Yankees would have won a hundred games without him.

There is also a pretty good comparable to Miguel Andujar. His name is Robinson Cano. Remember him? He is a Met now. But Robinson Cano had stellar years with the Yankees. Yes, he was a bit of Machado without the mean streak, but he was really, really good.

Cano started a year younger than Andujar. But let's compare their first full season in the big leagues:

• OPS - Andujar: .855, Cano: .778
• OPS+ - Andujar: 126, Cano: .106
• rWAR - Andujar: 2.2, Cano: 0.8
• dWAR - Andujar: -2.2, Cano: -1.8

Maybe those comparisons are not fair to Cano because he was a year younger. Cano blossomed in his second year. Let's compare Andujar's first year to Cano's second:

• OPS - Andujar: .855, Cano: .890
• OPS+ - Andujar: 126, Cano: 126
• rWAR - Andujar: 2.2, Cano: 3.2
• dWAR - Andujar: -2.2, Cano: -0.1

At least they are in the ballpark. But again, that was Cano's second full season. Andujar is faulted for his swing at everything approach. He walked only 28 times. Cano only walked 18 times in both his first and second seasons. Cano was able to build his walk rate to the 50-60 range mid-career. There is no reason to think that Andujar could not do the same.

Let's talk about Miguel Andujar's defense. It would be foolish to think that Miguel Andujar could become as good a defender as Robinson Cano became. Cano has better instincts and range. But, by all means, Andujar could get much better than he was in 2018. For one, make the guy play on the front of the dirt so that he does not lose runners being so deep. Work with him on not backpedaling on everything. If he could approach league average, he would be a superstar for years to come.

As good as Robinson Cano has been as an offensive player, Andujar can be better. He was a better hitter in the minors and he started with a bang in his rookie season. He seems like a Roberto Clemente-type offensive talent with more power. Other than his low walk total, there is nothing not to like about him offensively. He is going to be a batting star in the Majors for a long while. That's a hunch, of course and time will tell.

There is another strange thing about this rumor: Why would the Mets trade one of the team's star pitchers if pitching and Realmuto is the team's only shot of post season glory? It does not seem to make sense for them to do so.

Perhaps serving Andujar up for a trade will help the Yankees in the near future. But consider that Chase Headley, a veteran, only had a higher rWAR once while with the Yankees than Andujar's 2.2 tally. And that 2.2 tally was the exact same as the 2012 Alex Rodriguez who cost a heck of a lot more money. The bottom line is that losing Miguel Andujar will hurt and we will see him in the All Star game for years to come...playing for somebody else.

Defensive statistics are still confusing

I wish I was an analytic savant. I really do. For one thing, in this day and age of baseball writing, such ability is where the action is. I try. But like most, I depend on the major stat sites to tell me what I need to know even if I do not understand how they got there. And in most cases, things make sense. Miguel Cabrera was a better offensive player than Prince Fielder. Clayton Kershaw was a much more valuable pitcher than Bronson Arroyo. But fielding stats still baffle me because the major sites do not always agree with each other.

Oh, the two sites agree on Manny Machado and Andrelton Simmons. The major sites are in agreement within a few percentage points of each other. Both had historically good fielding seasons. The sites agree that Michael Young and Miguel Cabrera were terrible in the field. They differ more widely on the awfulness, but all sites confirm they were bad.

But there are too many others that are so off the charts different that it leaves us neophytes gasping at straws. I want to give you a few examples. But first, the common disclaimer must be made. Just about everyone who is smarter than me says that you have to look at a player's fielding over a three year period to get a fairer view of a player's fielding ability. Don't ask me why. But that is what I hear all the time. And of course, the natural disclaimer that I don't always know what I am talking about.

Let's start with Brett Gardner. As a left fielder in 2011, he was rated highly, so highly in fact that it turned his rather mundane offensive numbers into a pretty good valuation. Gardner lost most of 2012 to injury and then this year took over center field--a position that most thought he was most suited for. So how did Gardner do in center in 2013. Darned if I know.

Fangraphs.com rated him at 1.7 runs above average on defense for eighth best among qualifying center fielders. Baseball Prospectus rated him at seven runs below average for his defense. But then you get to Baseball-reference.com.

According to that site, Gardner cost the Yankees more runs on defense than any other player in baseball. According to them, he was 20 total zone runs below average, the most negative number they gave anybody! How can three sites differ so much?

Well, part of that is how the information is displayed that is not necessarily the bottom line. When Fangraphs.com puts that fielding runs next to a player on that player's dashboard, the number includes positional value and replacement value. For example, if you go to the Value section of Gardner's page there, you will find that they rated him at five runs below average, which is close to what Baseball Prospectus gave him. But that -0.5 was offset by a 1.8 positional value which brings him up to a 1.3.

Baseball-reference.com gives him a -20 total zone runs below average, but if you go to where they do their valuations, they give him six runs above average for his fielding and when they add in the positional scarcity equation, he is given 1.1 dWAR based on 18 runs above average. Are you as confused as me yet?

So despite B-R giving him the highest negative on total zone runs in baseball, his defensive valuation is actually higher on their bottom line and as such, they give him 4.2 rWAR compared to Fangraphs' 3.2 fWAR. He received 2.5 WARP from Baseball Prospectus. That is because B-R uses two different fielding systems. One is total zone runs and the other is BIS. More on this in the next paragraph.

Let's take another example. I wanted to see how Shin-Soo Choo made out this year since it was quite a story before the season started that the Reds would make him their every day center fielder. This gets to be quite confusing. Baseball-reference.com actually lists two sources for their fielding stats. One is total zone runs (it has a longer name, but that will do) which is provided by BaseballProjection.com and the other is BIS defensive runs saved above average, which is provided by Baseball Info Solutions.

Choo is given +13 runs above average in total zone runs, the 21st highest in baseball in 2013! But BIS has him at -18 runs saved below average. Choo is given -13.3 fielding runs by Fangraphs and -3.3 by Baseball Prospectus. But again, like Gardner, we need to dig down to the bottom line.

Let's start with Fangraphs. In that site's valuation section, he is given -15.5 for his fielding runs above average. He gets a 1.8 positional adjustment which gives him a total of -13.3 fielding score. Over at Baseball-reference, he get a +13 for his total zone runs but a -18 for his BIS score. In that site's valuation section, they use the -18 number and then add in three for his positional scarcity but still give him a 1.8 dWAR. Baseball Prospectus gives him a defensive score of -3.2. Yes, that hissing sound is my head about to explode.

The bottom line or WAR score for Choo goes like this: 5.2 fWAR, 4.2 rWAR and 6.1 WARP. Ugh.

Let's do one more: Norichika Aoki of the Brewers. Baseball-reference.com gives him a total zone runs of 26, the third highest of anyone! And his BIS score is 13, or half of the other score. Fangraphs gives him a -3.5. Uh. Baseball Prospectus gave him a -3.8. So at least two out of three agree.

Drilling down again to the value sections, Fangraphs actually lists his fielding score at a positive 3.2, but since he played a corner outfield spot, he gets a lot of negative positional hit to bring him down to the -3.5 score and an fWAR of 1.7.

Baseball-reference.com gives him a positive 13 number for his fielding (it seems obvious they use the BIS score) and after knocking him some for his positional scarcity, he ends up with a +0.6 dWAR and a 3.0 rWAR. Baseball Prospectus knocks him all the way back to 1 WARP. With a win valued around $5 million (1.7 fWAR = $8.7 mil in value), that is a $10 million swing in the bottom lines.

I am not doing all this to criticize these sites. How can you criticize when you have no idea how the analysis is done? All I am saying is that the uneducated writer like me who tries his darned best to use these metrics, the slope is slippery and very, very confusing.

Gold Glove Awards - Your Real Trick or Treat

For the first time ever, we get a preview of the Rawlings Gold Glove Award as the award has let us in on who the nominees are. Twitter buddy (and terrific writer), Ian Bethune from over at Sox & Dogs has the list of nominees up on his site. With just a few exceptions, the list of nominees is a joke. It's an embarrassment to baseball and to Rawlings. And it will be an embarrassment to ESPN when they host the award announcement show. The only good news from the list is at least we won't get Derek Jeter to kick around this year as he is not on the ballot. Thank goodness for small miracles.

There is an alternative to the Gold Gloves called the Fielding Bible Awards.  And while this is a much better award process, the drawbacks are that it's hosted by just one of the fielding metric systems (Baseball Info Solutions) and it only names one overall major league winner at each position instead of naming one in each league at each position.

What the Fan proposes to do for the rest of this post is to list the Gold Glove Award nominees by position, give you their prospective rank from Fangraphs and Baseball-reference.com and then who should have been the Gold Glove Award winner for 2011. Feel free to argue. One other note. Since the catcher rarely starts as many as the other positions, that position won't go by qualifying for the batting title. The other positions go by at least 400 plate appearances as you should be near a full time player to qualify for a fielding award (IMHO). Here we go:

Pitcher - Aw, forget the pitcher. Who really cares.

Catcher

• Nominees:  AL - Matt Wieters (F -1, B-R - 2), A.J. Pierzynski (F - 38, B-R - 45)  and Alex Avilla (F-37, B-R - 19)
• Nominees: NL - Yadier Molina (F - 39, B-R - 3), Brian McCann (F - 57, B-R - 63), Carlos Ruiz (F - 52, B-R - 13)
• Who should be the Gold Glove: AL - Matt Wieters. The other two nominees are a joke. There are whispers that the Oriole pitchers don't like throwing to Wieters because he is so tall.  NL - Miguel Montero

First Base

• Nominees: NL - Joey Votto (F - 2, B-R - 6), Gaby Sanchez (F - 4, B-R - 2) and James Loney (F - 5, B-R - 78)
• Nominees: AL - Adrian Gonzalez (F - 1, B-R - 1), Mark Teixeira (F - 2, B-R - 70) and Casey Kotchman (F - 4, B-R - 58)
• Who should be the Gold Glove: NL - Gaby Sanchez.  AL - Adrian Gonzalez

Second Base

• Nominees: AL - Dustin Pedroia (F - 1, B-R - 3), Robinson Cano (F - 12, B-R - 50) and Ian Kinsler (F - 3, B-R - 2)
• Nominees: NL - Brandon Phillips (F - 1, B-R - tied 28), Neil Walker (F - 9, B-R - tied 79) and Omar Infante (F - 3, B-R - 1)
• Who should be the Gold Glove:  AL - Pedroia or Howie Kendrick.  NL - Omar Infante

Shortstop

• Nominees: NL - Troy Tulowitzki (F - 2, B-R - 4), Ronny Cedeno (F - 3, B-R - 4) and Alex Gonzalez (F - 5, B-R - 5)
• Nominees: AL - Erick Aybar (F - 9, B-R - 9), J.J. Hardy (F - 2, B-R - 6) and Asdrubal Cabrera (F - Last, B-R - 48)
• Who should be the Gold Glove: NL - Clint Barmes  AL - Tough one. Either Elvis Andrus or J.J. Hardy

Third Base

• Nominees: NL: Placido Polanco (F - 1, B-R - 2), Daniel Descalso (F - DNQ, B-R - 90) and Pablo Sandoval (F - 2, B-R - 1)
• Nominees: AL: Adrian Beltre (F - 1, B-R - 2), Kevin Youkilis (F - 7, B-R - 10) and Evan Longoria (F - 3, B-R - 3)
• Who should be the Gold Glove: NL - Tie between Polanco and Sandoval  AL - Adrian Beltre

Left Field

• Nominees: AL: Alex Gordon (F - 2, B-R - 2), Brett Gardner (F - 1, B-R - 1) and Sam Fuld (F - DNQ, B-R - 7)
• Nominees: NL: Gerardo Parra (F - 2, B-R - 2), Ryan Braun (F - 8, B-R - 4) and Matt Holliday (F - 5, B-R - Tied 41)
• Who should be the Gold Glove: AL - Brett Gardner (but Gordon's 20 assists sure are impressive)  NL - Gerardo Parra (Carlos Lee led both systems, but come on) 

Center Field

• Nominees: NL: Matt Kemp (F - 10, B-R - 6), Shane Victorino (F - 5, B-R - 10) and Chris Young (F - 1, B-R - 1)
• Nominees: AL: Jacoby Ellsbury (F - 1, B-R - 5), Austin Jackson (F - 3, B-R - 4) and Peter Bourjos (F - 4, B-R - 2)
• Who should be the Gold Glove:  NL - Chris Young  AL - Peter Bourjos

Right Field

• Nominees: AL: Nick Markakis (F - 9, B-R - 80), Torii Hunter (F - 7, B-R - 72) and Jeff Francoeur (F - 5, B-R - 77)
• Nominees: NL: Andre Ethier (F - 3, B-R - 103), Carlos Beltran (F - 15, B-R - 98) and Jay Bruce (F - 10, B-R - 106)
• Who should be the Gold Glove: AL - Nick Swisher  NL - Jason Heyward

Once again, it's very depressing that there is such a disparity between the fielding metric systems. That doesn't make this job very easy. But it's easy to see already that four of the Gold Gloves are going to be dead wrong. That's already in the 25 percent error range. And that's too bad. Because once again, with that kind of error rate, the Gold Gloves will once again be without merit and laughable.

Some Questions About Fielding Metrics

This is going to be one of those posts that frustrate you by posing questions without giving the answers. The Fan fully recognizes his in advance. And the reason this post will work out that way is because the Fan doesn't know the answers. These are simply questions that baffle the poster. And the reason for the questions in the first place is because the two most respected sources for WAR (Wins Above Replacement), Fangraphs and Baseball-Reference.com completely disagree far too often and the disagreement comes down to fielding. Both organizations use different fielding metric sources to equate the fielding part of the WAR equation. Baseball-reference.com has heard about these disparities so often that it has taken the drastic step of listing WAR, bWAR (batting WAR) and fWAR (fielding WAR) for those who want to rate players without the distraction of the fielding metrics.

Take for example, the case of Robinson Cano. The Yankees' second baseman was four in the majors in assists and made three errors all year. But according to Fangraphs, he's only the ninth best fielding second baseman in the majors. They place his fielding as a negative value at -0.6. How can his fielding be a negative value!? Baseball-reference.com doesn't really help Cano's case either. They flat lined him at 0.0. In other words, he didn't provide any value for his defense. How is that possible? And Cano's case isn't the only one. His infield-mate, Teixeira, also gets no love from fielding metrics despite scouts raving about him. Yeah, the Fan knows the observation versus stat argument and agrees that the stats usually come out ahead. But clearly something is deficient here.

So what are the questions then? Okay. Here they are. But remember, they don't have answers and thus frustrate not only the readers of the post, but the one who writes it:

• If a good third baseman routinely ranges deep to this left (as he is encouraged to do) and continuously snares the ball in front of the shortstop, does that count against the shortstop since he didn't field the ball in his zone?
• The same thing applies for first baseman ranging far to the right to field a ball in the second baseman's zone (remember the Cabrera play in the infamous Galarraga one-hitter?). Does the second baseman get a minus for not fielding that ball in his zone?
• The centerfielder is told to run down balls no matter where they are hit. So he routinely races to right or left to make a catch. Is that a minus for the left fielder or right fielder for not making the play in their zones?
• Big Papi is at the plate and a shift is put on and the shortstop is playing on the right side of the second base bag. Papi hits the ball right to him. Does that count against the second baseman since the shortstop fielded the ball in his zone?
• Say a shortstop ranges far up the middle and dives and stops the ball but can't get the runner out at second. In the meantime, his efforts kept the runner on second from scoring as he would have if the ball had gone into the outfield. Does that count against the shortstop? He didn't get an out, right?
• A ball is slammed up the middle but the pitcher gets a good piece of it with his glove. Unfortunately, the ball trickles over to third and the third baseman tries to bare hand it because that is his only shot at getting the runner, but he misses it. Does that dink against the third baseman in the fielding stats?

Those are this Fan's questions. They may very well be very stupid questions and this post may well be chewed up on some baseball think-tank site (and yes, that's happened before. Just do a search on the Flagrant Fan and you'll find them). The fielding metrics may already take that stuff into account. But the Fan doesn't know that and what if it doesn't? Either way, the fielding metrics are not trusted by a large percentage of writers these days and it seems for good reason. Signs point to even better ways of measuring fielders with FieldF/X. That would be welcomed. Any improvement would sure go a long way to properly value a player.