The Case for Andruw Jones
I know, I know ... we should punt 2008, think about the long term, and play the kids. But playing the kids isn't going to be enough. This team is starved for talent and should be looking to bring in good players anywhere they can be found.
Signing a high-priced free agent on the wrong side of thirty makes sense to me only under the following conditions:
a) He has some marquee value.
b) He's not horrifically overpriced.
c) He fills an immediate need for the Giants, and thus can help make the next couple of years, which look to be bleak, a little more respectable.
d) He projects to still be a productive player two or three years down the road, when we might reasonably hope to have a contending team again.
Andruw Jones meets all four conditions, I think.
a) He's a former MVP, a perennial gold glove winner, and is in the postseason every year. That should make him famous enough to put butts in seats.
b) He is expected to sign for 5 years/$80 million, maybe less. I'll get into the math later, but as I see it this is substantially below the current free-agent market rates.
c) By "immediate need," I mean "someone to hit home runs." But though it may sound crazy, center field is a need as well. Although Sabean has been pathologically collecting center fielders , none of them is particularly good. Rajai Davis looks like a fine fielder but a marginal hitter. Fred Lewis is badly stretched at the position and can't hit lefties; the best role for him is as a platoon player in a corner. Roberts and Ortmeier obviously aren't solutions. Our best CF is Randy Winn, but he's not a good defensive player in center; at 33, he's probably headed downhill; and moreover, he's one of very few veterans on the roster who should have enough trade value to bring back a decent prospect.
d) Jones is 30, turning 31 early next season. He's one of the most durable players in the game, having been a regular for ten years and logging at least 154 games every single year. As a fielder, he's still exceptional. As a hitter, he's been up and down over the years, but generally quite good. His rotten 2007 is alarming -- but that rotten season is exactly what makes him affordable. I'm confident that that bad season was a fluke and that he'll be hitting .260 with a decent OBP and 30+ home runs for the next several years.
**
In 2007, Jones's component stats -- strikeout rate, walk rate, GB/LD/FB percentages -- were in their usual range, but the results weren't there. The first problem is that his batting average on balls in play was quite low, 30 points off his career level. This isn't really a concern; it will almost certainly come back up next year and he'll hit in the .260s again.
The other problem with his 2007 is more worrisome: he lost a lot of power. Specifically, although he was hitting as many fly balls as usual, his home run per fly ball rate dropped sharply, from an
established level of 21.1% down to 13.4%.
This is bad, but there's no particular reason to believe that it represents a real change in his ability. Spikes happen. Jim Thome's hr/fb rate took an even more precipitous dive in 2005; the next year, it was back in its normal range. Carlos Beltran had a bad season that year as well; after posting hr/fb rates of 17.6, 17.9, and 17.6, in 2005 he dropped to 8.8. The next year, he was at 21.1. ARod's hr/fb rates over the last five years have gone 25, 19, 26, 20, 27.
There is a potential physical explanation for Andruw's bad year: On May 27, he hyperextended his elbow making a catch, and it bothered him the rest of the season. We can also speculate that since he was in a well-hyped contract year, he was putting too much pressure on himself. There's no way to know exactly, but it seems far more likely that his bad season was a fluke than that a 30-year-old with a clean injury record and tons of natural talent suddenly went off the cliff and will no longer be the same player.
**
During his career -- including his early years as a part-timer, his awful 2007, everything -- Jones has averaged .263/.342/.497, creating 5.86 runs per 27 outs. Over the course of 150 games, that's 98 runs. Replacement level these days is in the neighborhood of 60-65 runs. So Jones is 35 runs better than replacement with the bat.
With the glove, he's not quite the marvel he once was, but he's still good. The Fielding Bible +/- system ranks him as the very best center fielder in the game, saving 20 runs or more above the level of the average CF. However, the other state-of-the-art defensive measurement, UZR, has him as almost exactly average. I don't know which of these is more correct (though I suspect it's the first one), but it seems reasonable to split the difference and call him 10 runs better than
average.
Altogether, then, that's at least 45 runs better than replacement level, or 4.5 wins. Per Tango's salary
calculator, a fun little tool that factors in both inflation and expected decline in order to give a crude guess at a player's fair-market value, Jones could thus expect to receive $17-$19 million per season: four years for $75 million, five for $91, six for $106, in there somewhere. But because GMs overrate the importance of the most recent season, he's not going to get it.
*
The lesson of the Detroit Tigers' post-2003 turnaround is that it's not enough to draft & develop well or scoop up free talent or make sharp trades or sign expensive free agents. If you want to get from bad to good in a hurry, you have to do all of them at once.
This is one of the very rare opportunities to get a star free agent at a relative discount, and Sabean should go after it.
This FanPost is reader-generated, and it does not necessarily reflect the views of McCovey Chronicles. If the author uses filler to achieve the minimum word requirement, a moderator may edit the FanPost for his or her own amusement.
0 recs |
65 comments
Comments
Re: The Case for Andruw Jones
by orangeandblackattack on Nov 24, 2007 9:06 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: The Case for Andruw Jones
by positiveuphemism on Nov 24, 2007 9:24 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: The Case for Andruw Jones
by RUSirius on Nov 24, 2007 10:07 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: The Case for Andruw Jones
by Evan on Nov 24, 2007 1:22 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: The Case for Andruw Jones
I think his problems hitting the ball were mechanical, but if Boras gets the Giants to outbid themselves again, I'll be pissed.
I would find a defensive OF with Davis and Jones particularly exciting.
by jasomack on Nov 24, 2007 2:04 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: The Case for Andruw Jones
by Bhaakon on Nov 24, 2007 3:16 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: The Case for Andruw Jones
But if Andruw had batted .284 on balls in play, his overall season's average would have been .243, which is just over half the way back up to his .262 of the season before and to his career .263 mark.
Incidentally, when Andruw batted .262 in 2006 his BABIP was 10 points below his career average at .273. And when he hit .263 in 2005, his BABIP was 40 points below his career average at just .243. It may be that as Andruw is losing speed (perhaps both running speed and bat speed), his BABIP is declining.
If Andruw's decline in 2007 was indeed injury-related, I guess the question would be, can he stay healthy in the future? The large number of games per season he has averaged in his career would seem to indicate that is still a good possibility.
Andruw's homers have dropped from 51 in 2005 to just 26 last season. If he drought was heavily injury-related, I would expect his homers to have just made it over the fence and for him to have a lot of balls that fell just short of the fence. In reality, most of his homers appeared to be well-struck, and he had very few warning track shots.
by sharksrog on Nov 24, 2007 10:13 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Andruw Jones
Over his career, on contact batting average: 268.
On contact slugging: 507.
On contact BA, from 2004-2006: 281.
On contact slugging, from 2004-2006: 569
On contact BA, 2006: 273
On contact sluggin, 2006: 575
Basically, as he got older, he started hitting the ball harder. Which is why his on contact numbers were on an upward curve. Which is why he was getting better results whenever he hit the ball. Except for 2007. In 2007, his on contact numbers fell below his career averages, and far below his averages from 2004-2006.
Yes, it is possible that he has suffered a permanent decline in his skills in 2007 that has resulted in him no longer hitting the ball hard.
Yes, it is possible that he went from hitting the ball very hard in 2006, well above his career averages, to weakly in 2007, below his career averages, due entirely to a permanent decline in his skills.
Yes, it is possible that he suffered a permanent and precipitous decline in skills in 1 year.
by rfloh on Nov 24, 2007 10:59 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Andruw Jones
by Evan on Nov 24, 2007 1:26 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Well, if you look at his on contact
His on contact slugging noticeably jumped.
Hitters like BLB, Thome, Ryan Howard, McGwire, Cust, ie hitters who murder the ball, all have exceptional on contact numbers.
OTOH, weak slappy hitters like Neifi or Juan Pierre have pathetic on contact numbers.
by rfloh on Nov 24, 2007 2:08 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
UGGH
Career on contact BA: 335
Career on contact SLG: 632
2004-2006 on contact BA: 334
2004-2006 on contact SLG: 679
2006 on contact BA: 337
2006 on contact SLG: 683
2007 on contact BA: 262
2007 on contact SLG: 487
by rfloh on Nov 25, 2007 1:22 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: The Case for Andruw Jones
But his health record is about as clean as you can find for a 31-year-old ballplayer.
by Evan on Nov 24, 2007 1:24 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: The Case for Andruw Jones
Also the type of injury seems to me to be a singular incident sort of injury (although those types of injuries tend to creep up as players age).
But the point made a few times here, that he's 30/31, seldom injured, has played in more than 150 games most of his career, reminds me of Ray D. Rules change as bodies age and I think an injury-clear track record should be tempered with an examination of the player's off-season conditioning approach as he enters the 31+ age category. A clean bill of health, and a history of resiliency and a hearty constitution are clearly important, but now I worry about off-season conditioning and a greater concern with condition for player's in AJones age category.
by kennv on Nov 24, 2007 5:09 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: The Case for Andruw Jones
--Players with broad offensive skills tend to age the best. Jones isn't a slam dunk in this case because he doesn't steal bases or hit for a high average. On the other hand, he does play a premium defensive position, an indication of speed.
--He just doesn't look that athletic anymore. Not sure what to make of that.
--I suspect he does bounce back at least somewhat. Pat Burrell and Mike Lowell, for example, also had years where their batting averages collapsed, but they made it back.
--If Sabean decided he wanted to make a splash, Jones is probably as decent bet as any for the price we're talking about. I'm not necessarily convinced, but there are much, much worse options out there.
by Dan from NM on Nov 24, 2007 10:20 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: The Case for Andruw Jones
Maybe it's coaching. Maybe he just decided he didn't care about that part of the game. That would be a disappointing decision from a fan's perspective, but on the other hand we've all seen what hoarding his talent did for Barry Bonds over the years.
I think there's a general perception that Andruw is a bit lazy, that he hasn't worked has hard as he might and his game hasn't developed to the degree that was prophesized -- that is, he hasn't been as good as Willie Mays. I don't know whether this is true or not. If so, I guess it doesn't bode well for how he will age. But that also cuts both ways: If he has left some talent on the table, he might get better when (if) maturity kicks in. I wouldn't be surprised if he turns out to be more productive in his early 30s than in his late 20s. (As Willie was, in fact.)
by Evan on Nov 24, 2007 1:35 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: The Case for Andruw Jones
by jasomack on Nov 24, 2007 2:07 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: The Case for Andruw Jones
by Mike Benjamin Hit King on Nov 25, 2007 12:25 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: The Case for Andruw Jones
by orangeandblackattack on Nov 24, 2007 11:00 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: The Case for Andruw Jones
by Evan on Nov 24, 2007 1:37 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: The Case for Andruw Jones
by SloIsLonelyForTheOrange on Nov 24, 2007 11:08 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: The Case for Andruw Jones
by rxmeister on Nov 24, 2007 11:20 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: The Case for Andruw Jones
by Sayhey on Nov 24, 2007 11:22 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: The Case for Andruw Jones
by Evan on Nov 24, 2007 1:42 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: The Case for Andruw Jones
by rxmeister on Nov 24, 2007 5:40 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: The Case for Andruw Jones
"The next good Giants team" will come the next time we have a critical mass of good, productive players. And we need to get started on collecting those guys one good personnel move at a time. I agree with Evan, sitting around and waiting on our farm system to spit forward a playoff team en masse is a recipe for long term disaster. Heck a mere three years from now, if we haven't gotten significantly better, we no doubt go into the winter with the number one issue being "who do we trade Matt Cain to before he walks", because good players who reach FA having never played on a .500 team don't stick around.
by Roger on Nov 25, 2007 10:08 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: The Case for Andruw Jones
by howtheyscored on Nov 25, 2007 11:10 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: The Case for Andruw Jones
by seyheystretch on Nov 24, 2007 12:30 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: The Case for Andruw Jones
by Bhaakon on Nov 24, 2007 12:47 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: The Case for Andruw Jones
Of course, the benefits of PED's disappear within minutes of non-use.
Muscle loss isn't evident for a year or so, particularly if one was to take HGH, which isn't tested.
Heads continue to enlarge and magnified hair loss 'just kind of happens' to these guys.
by seyheystretch on Nov 24, 2007 3:39 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: The Case for Andruw Jones
I'm quite sure that there are ways to beat the tests, so why would he suddenly quit taking on the eve of free agency? Especially if he was confident enough to take it right before serious testing began in 2005 (the year his HR total jumped by 22). This is utterly asinine. It's certainly possible that he was on something, but only in a vague "no one is above suspicion" sort of way.
by Bhaakon on Nov 24, 2007 3:57 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Muscle atrophy actually
by rfloh on Nov 24, 2007 10:19 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: The Case for Andruw Jones
I'd say his stats jumped once the league started testing.
by SloIsLonelyForTheOrange on Nov 24, 2007 12:48 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: The Case for Andruw Jones
by wilriv21 on Nov 24, 2007 12:41 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: The Case for Andruw Jones
uhhhhhh . . . no.
by SloIsLonelyForTheOrange on Nov 24, 2007 12:49 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: The Case for Andruw Jones
by NeifiChicken on Nov 24, 2007 1:28 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: The Case for Andruw Jones
by Cainer on Nov 24, 2007 1:31 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: The Case for Andruw Jones
by Evan on Nov 24, 2007 1:43 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: The Case for Andruw Jones
by Cainer on Nov 24, 2007 3:43 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: The Case for Andruw Jones
I read two articles in the national press about this year's FAs. Both made the point that Jones is very, very overrated - he is trading on his reputation, but is but a shadow of his former self. Both articles quoted scouts who said he had become selfish and homerun crazy - and is now overswinging and trying to pull everything. They also said his defense has really fallen - often times he does not even get to relatively routine flyballs. They both said he was not only hugely overrated but no longer had the drive to do anything but hit homeruns.
Sorry, I just cannot find the cites - but they were national articles - ESPN or SI.
Lastly, I don't see how Jones, once you figure in the risk, is worth soooo much more money than Winn. It seems to me we don't need more OFs - we need fewer (older) OFs so we can play and develop our younger ones. Our OF is not our problem. Our OFs hit (BAs - sorry, I'm old and understand BA more than other numbers) 304, 300, 287, 279. Even Roberts, whose season BA was 269, once he'd recovered from his surgery, hit 291 post all star). I just don't see sitting one or more of those guys for, hopefully, a few more HRs. What we need is IFs. Our IF last year hit 267 (Frandsen), 260, 253, 252, 246, 218, w/ OPS of 710, 744, 708, 672, 621, 638. WE have 1b and 3b open, and those are the spots to improve over last year, are the spots that we have nothing in the system (unlike OF). No need for the risk of AJones. Better to take a risk on Sexton or Tejeda or Crede - guys who'll fill positions for which we have NOOOOOO answer.
by allfrank on Nov 24, 2007 2:49 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: The Case for Andruw Jones
- Pitching was not an area of need for the Giants when Zito was signed, OTOH, hitting is an area of dire need for the team right now.
- Zito was coming off 3 down years (when compared to his peak, and especially when looking at his peripherals), with no obvious explanation for the fading performance beyond diminished abilities. Jones is coming off of one down year, which could be explained by an injury.
- There appeared to be interest in Zito from large market teams, notably the Mets, driving up Boras's leverage (ignoring, for a minute, rumors that no other team was willing to clear 100M). Jones, OTOH, seems to be garnering little interest from large-payroll clubs.
by Bhaakon on Nov 24, 2007 3:33 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: The Case for Andruw Jones
by Evan on Nov 24, 2007 3:42 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: The Case for Andruw Jones
by jasomack on Nov 24, 2007 3:47 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: The Case for Andruw Jones
now I've seen it all.
by Mark carry on on Nov 24, 2007 3:57 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: The Case for Andruw Jones
by Evan on Nov 24, 2007 3:50 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: The Case for Andruw Jones
I'm thinking of a C-word, and it isn't banned by the FCC.
by Bhaakon on Nov 24, 2007 3:59 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: The Case for Andruw Jones
by Buzzword on Nov 24, 2007 5:42 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: The Case for Andruw Jones
by Bhaakon on Nov 24, 2007 7:12 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: The Case for Andruw Jones
by rxmeister on Nov 24, 2007 7:43 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: The Case for Andruw Jones
I've watched Andrew Jones since he first came on the scene with the Atlanta Braves in 96. I remember Bobby Cox often talking with the reporters to explain the difference between his obvious talent and his lapses of focus. When I first saw Jones patrolling the outfield, I thought I haven't seen anyone since Willie Mays with such fluidity and movement and if I'm not overstating it, it was like ballet, it was a thing of beauty, but it's not there anymore. And if I may return to Barry, with no intent to be unfair, but to make a point of commitment. Barry has kept himself in shape while I can't say, from what I can see, that is the case for Jones. The final point, and I have absolutely no proof for my opinion, but I don't think that is his real age. The difference between when he first came up and where he is in this stage of his life is, for me, quite startling for someone who is suppose to be 30-31. Regretfully, I think he is on the downward slope of his career.
by Buzzword on Nov 25, 2007 4:43 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: The Case for Andruw Jones
by Bhaakon on Nov 25, 2007 1:31 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: The Case for Andruw Jones
by howtheyscored on Nov 24, 2007 2:53 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: The Case for Andruw Jones
by Natto on Nov 24, 2007 3:46 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: The Case for Andruw Jones
by howtheyscored on Nov 24, 2007 4:09 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: The Case for Andruw Jones
by allfrank on Nov 24, 2007 3:49 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: The Case for Andruw Jones
by Evan on Nov 24, 2007 3:51 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: The Case for Andruw Jones
On a side not, keeping as many picks as possible is one positive side effect of spending all the FA money on one big player. Especially useful since the Giants aren't likely to get any compensation picks.
by Bhaakon on Nov 24, 2007 4:02 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: The Case for Andruw Jones
by Evan on Nov 24, 2007 4:14 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: The Case for Andruw Jones
by Bhaakon on Nov 24, 2007 7:12 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: The Case for Andruw Jones
by Dan from NM on Nov 24, 2007 4:14 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: The Case for Andruw Jones
by VidaWantsYourCar on Nov 24, 2007 4:39 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: The Case for Andruw Jones
I don't feel that AJones fits the role of IRod in the Giants07::Tigers03 analogy, at this moment. I think AROD did - maybe even at 10 years/Bazillion dollars. inflation (Isn't that what an aging star catcher cost the Tigers back then... ie way too much.) but the argument in this thread is sound... and after some more thinking, maybe my "feeling" will start to agree with you. thanks for your thoughts.
by kennv on Nov 24, 2007 5:47 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: The Case for Andruw Jones
by rxmeister on Nov 24, 2007 7:48 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: The Case for Andruw Jones
by ololo3 on Nov 25, 2007 10:33 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: The Case for Andruw Jones
So, when Sabean signs him (as I'm sure he will, since Brian always makes bad moves like this) I won't become catatonic. I'll just look forward to all the "told-you-so" posts I can make next year.
by Lyle on Nov 25, 2007 3:51 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: The Case for Andruw Jones
by nick on Nov 27, 2007 1:27 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

by 

















