Gomez vs. Young
There's been a lot of talk about what to upgrade on the Twins but one thing that the Twins also need to consider is making a decision on who to start between Gomez and Young. They're both still very young (23) which is the average age at AA, however Gomez just played his 2nd full major league season and Young his 3rd. They both still have tons of potential even though they haven't become the players we hoped they would just yet.
It' been said many times here and elsewhere that it has not helped either of them to be sitting on the bench. For the players sake and for the Twins sake they need to decide on one and send the other away. It's a tough decision as whoever they ship away could come back to haunt them because both have all star ceilings (remember I said ceiling, not what I expect).
I really don't have a ton of time to break everything down statistically so I'll leave that up to anyone who feels the initiative to do so. I just felt like this was a debate that could/should take place in its own fanpost. My personal opinion is to keep Gomez. He already is a great defender and if he never develops offensively he'll at least give us great defense. Gomez also allows the Twins to use Span at a corner which improves the defense and allows the Twins to not have to worry about at 4th/5th OF being able to play Center as Span can still slide over there as needed. Gomez might not be the better hitter yet, but he does appear to be working on his patience as his walk rate went up 2.5% while his K rate went down 3% (Delmons both went the other direction). He never got a consistent shot at starting this year and my hope would be that he would improve those numbers even more in the future as a result of everyday play. So now it's your turn what do you think and why?
0 recs |
79 comments
Comments
Assuming your poll means Gomez v. Young..
There is no comparison. Gomez is the more valuable player by far.
http://twinkietalk.com
http://thecollegehockeyblog.com
by fetch9 on Oct 30, 2009 3:00 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Denard span :)
In all seriousness, Delmon is far move valuable with the bat then Gomez. Gomez is more valuable with the glove. Here’s the rub though. You can send down Gomez, but not Young. Neither is winning games for us. Young also showed quite a bit of signs of improvement at the plate the last half of the season. I’m willing to give Young his shot to play everday. Gomez on the other hand, can learn is trade in AAA, and it makes sense from a service time issue as well as a development issue to simply let him do that. Unless you can get decent value for Young in a trade (and I don’t think you can), we may as well play him every day and see if he can start hitting 20 HRs, which if he continues from the last half of the season is possible. I agree he needs help with his approach, and his defense isn’t great (though I think we pound on him a bit more than we should), but keeping both up here is ridiculous, and one has options remaining.
This really is an easy decision. I’m not sure why it wasn’t done last season, as now Gomez is arb eligible. Ok, I am somewhat sure, it has more to do with making it look as though the Santana trade will pay dividends. I’d argue that the longer we let Gomez develop in the majors, the less dividends it will pay. Give him a year (or 2) in AAA to learn how to hit and bring him back up when you can reasonably expect him to hit .270 with a decent OBP… at which point he’s suddenly very, very valuable.
by diehardtwinsfan on Oct 30, 2009 10:16 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
This is great in theory . . .
However, will they actually send Gomez down? I love this option because it avoids the chance that one becomes a star somewhere else. If the Twins did this and Gomez did well enough in AAA they could seriously consider trading Young or Cuddyer in a year if they felt comfortable with a Span, Gomez, and Cuddy/Young outfield. They just need to get that every day playing time so they can prove themselves, good or bad.
Peyton's good but have you ever heard of Jeff George?
by halfchest on Oct 30, 2009 1:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Young also showed quite a bit of signs of improvement at the plate the last half of the season.
True, and he did in 2008. Young is entirely a second half hitter. If Gomez can develop, he will be an all year player. Gomez is the more valuable since he can bunt, steal and be the best defensive CF in the league. That to me outweighs Delmon, who can hit doubles and homers – once in a while.
"Don't take life for granted, because tomorrow isn't promised to any of us." - Kirby Puckett
by 33MorneauMVP on Oct 30, 2009 10:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
one other thing
I should note that I don’t believe either is far more valuable. Gomez would be best served as a pinch runner or defensive sub at this point. In Young’s case, he can play most every day. I think it’s a bit of a wash in terms of their value. I just believe we aren’t donig anyone a favor by keeping them both up here.
by diehardtwinsfan on Oct 30, 2009 10:18 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
What do you need.......
Right field. Cuddyer hits 25+ homers and knocks in 100 runs and bats .275. Decent. This is what you want, consistenly. Who will repalce him in the future? Maybe Span/Young, or prospects like Tosoni, and then you get to Parmelee.
Left field. Young started to shine at season’s end. Again, you’d like someone with some punch, approaching 20+ homers, and keeping an average there in the .280 arena. A bit more defense, the capability of throwing home when a ball isn’t hit real deep. Young shows potential to do so. He must…work on his at-bats, be more patient, walk. He must watch his weight (long-term). Potential replacements…Span, Kubel if you want to everyday him, maybe Benson, Morales if Young becomes free-agent expensive. Morales may be the main man. Hicks, too, if he hits for punch.
Centerfield. Right now Span is a pretty good choice. He fields the position well, though not spectacular. He is hurt by having Cuddy on the right and Young on the left who are insufficient backups. But Span hits for average, takes pitches early in the game and is an excellent leadoff hitter. He doesn’t give the Twins as much power as you’d like from a corner outfielder, but does hit for power (I wish his doubles were a bit higher). He dpes steal bases.
The three above, if they reach league average or better potential for their positions, quite frankly are the best you could ask for.
The minute you start switching players, things change. Kubel is a more than adequate repalcement for Young in left, what you’d like to see from that position, but he weakens a Span centerfield. Then you want Gomez in center…which works…because Gomez gives you the range and, hopefully, some speed at the plate and decent hitting down-the-line. But then you have weakened the DH spot and have no where for a Span to play. Span is not the DH.
If you put Span in left, and have Gomez in center…then you better have a bigger bat or two on the left-side of the infield. It doesn’t matter how many guys you get on base…the Twins have been there and done that…if you can’t get them home. Guys who hit for power are also guys who hit sacrifice flys. How often did the Twins have someone on base and your batting order had Punto, Tolbert, Span and Cabrerra in the on-deck circle. Advancing the runner is one thing, but you need a nice mix of big and small ball in a lineup. With a weak Delmon Young, and no Crede, the Twins line-up suffered significantly in 2009.
Back to center. Span. You could put him left and alternate Kubel and Cuddyer in right and designated hitter. That would work. Gomez in center. There’s so much potential. But let’s send him down to the minors for a bit more seasoning.
The problem with Gomez right now is that if you send him down to the minors, which also decreases his service time, he has a couple of guys on his heels. Revere will start at New Britain. If he performs there, he’ll be in AAA the following season, and might even have a call-up. If Revere continues to play like he does, he is the centerfielder of the future (unless Benson and Hicks kick it up a notch, but both are at least a year or two behind Revere).
In 2012 Cuddyer could be gone. In three years, you have to ask how much you would pay Span or Young for their production. Gomez has 3-4 years, in which you have to price them out against prospects coming up and what is on the market. In as litle as three years, the Twins outfield conceivably might be Morales, Revere, Span and Gomez. Maybe Cuddyer will be around as DH, or still Kubel. I imagine Young will be a free agent as soon as possible and walk, performing admirably in his final arbitration year to egt the big salary.
So, who is more valuable?
Can you egt anything for Young? The age, the potential. It’s there. But he needs to show himself off a bit more. Will he? That’s the question. Young as a long-time Twin, I doubt it. If you can move him for someone that might still be contributing in 2012-13-14, I would do so.
Gomez? He needs seasoning. He’s around to show that the Twins got something for Santana. Really, sadly, truly. The Twins have already lost two pitchers from that trade, and got a wizened veteran. Rauch and Guerra for Santana. Hummmmmmm. Maybe a year-or-two of All-Star Gomez would make the deal look better. But maybe that’s all you get. Gomez will become expensive when he should start producing, and will he produce enough to warrant the expense, especially if Revere is basically the same-type player. Maybe Gomez has a better upside, but we don’t know that.
But would anyone trade anything for Gomez, who would shine in Kansas City or Pittsburgh, but be a backup or back-to AAA in New York of Boston or Philadelphia.
We can’t spend 2010 with both in the majors. One has to relocate, and Gomez, no matter how he lights up the winter leagues or spring training, can go to AAA. He should be intelligent enough to know that he can only improve by doing so.
The Twins need to see Young play a full-season as a starter, for begin the seasona s a starter and then re-evaluate. If he can put up above league average numbers for left field, the Twins have to think if Span or Young is the future for leftfield, if Gomez comes back.
2009 was a wasted year for both Young and Gomez. It was a truly expensive year for the Twins, as now they have to basically do the experiment all-over again.
2010, with Gomez in the minors, means the Twins have an AAAA guy as backup. pridie, doubtful. Dustin Martin, maybe? Tosoni is still in the wings. Benson and Parmelee are still prospects. The future triumverate of Morales/Hicks/Revere is knocking on the door.
It’s all about need and construction, what are the strengths each player brings to the team and what does the team lose by throwing them on the field. And if the Twins can’t solve the 2B/SS/3B problem, it weakens, even further, the likelyhood of doing 2010 like 2009.
Visit www.TwinsCards.com and check out "rosters" to see my collection!
by rosterman on Oct 30, 2009 11:08 AM EDT reply actions 1 recs
Gomez is my choice
Though the word Hobson comes to mind.
They are so much better defensively with Gomez and Span in there. Span flanked by Cuddyer and Young is so range limited with a flyball pitching staff that I am willing to live with Gomez’ offense if I have to.
This is largely because Young can’t hit either. The problem with Young is that he just hasn’t moved forward one inch in 3 years. He showed marginally more power this year than in the past, but his walk and strikeout rates regressed. He’s a lousy baserunner. He grounds into a lot of double plays. There’s really nothing he does well. Compared to his peers—corner outfielders, he’s essentially lousy at everything.
Gomez at least provides defense. He didn’t get better either from 2008 to 2009. His walk and strikeout rates improved, but he hit less singles. (Without checking on it, it seems to me that he bunted for fewer hits this year).
Anyway, I don’t really care about service time/options at this point, and I think that should be a non-factor for these guys. Winning games should be the question. I think having Gomez in center and Span in left is, conservatively, 20 runs better defensively over the course of a season that Span in center and Young in left. Probably similar to the offensive difference, actually. But I’ll take the athletic guy who might be getting better with the plate discipline than the 23 year old who already moves like a rhinoceros.
by Eric in Madison on Oct 30, 2009 11:48 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
+1
Basically summed up my thoughts quite nicely.
But I’ll take the athletic guy who might be getting better with the plate discipline than the 23 year old who already moves like a rhinoceros.
Heh.
It’s unfortunate that Delmon didn’t get much better this year. Heating up at the end of the season isn’t convincing. Play that way all year, or even a good portion of it, and I may change my mind. It’s pretty clear at this point that Gomez>Young, especially defensively.
by fischean on Oct 30, 2009 11:57 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
agreed
Yah really when it comes down to it the Twins mishandled these guys by following in the footsteps of their former teams and rushing them to the majors. If you could start all over again Gomez starts in the minors back in 08 but at that time Span looked like a bust rather than a key player that he is today. Either way Young played in 150 games in 08 and 162 the year before that. He showed a bit more at the end of this year but mostly just a small sample size in my mind. Gomez consistently had a better plate approach this season and seems more open to learning and he really didn’t get any consistent playing time this year other than when Span was injured.
At the very least they need to put some feelers out for Young and see if they can package him and a pitcher maybe for something even if it ends up just being some prospects.
Peyton's good but have you ever heard of Jeff George?
by halfchest on Oct 30, 2009 1:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Delmon doesn't have as much upside
Did he make real progress towards the end of the year or is he just a slow starter? I suspect it’s a bit of both. The progress was more mental than physical. He had to hit rock bottom to start listening to Vavra. When he started listening to Vavra, he showed real improvement. He took more pitches (still maddeningly obsessed with the first pitch), he kept his weight back better, he got out front on more off speed stuff and drove it better. But he has work to do on patience and bat speed that I don’t see him improving that much. As his bat picked up, he showed more energy in the outfield.
But I don’t think he has the upside people thought he did when they traded him. I don’t see him improving all that much from what he had at the end of the year. Gomez has a lot more unfulfilled upside. They’re really close right now, taking offense and defense into account at the end of the year. But Gomez could be a star like Hunter in a couple of years. Delmon is Delmon.
"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot
by cmathewson on Oct 30, 2009 2:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Delmon is Delmon.
Sigh…missing Jason Bartlett right about now.
by fischean on Oct 30, 2009 3:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
We don't know if Delmon got better at the end of this year...
…because we need to discount the first half of this year. He was in Minnesota playing baseball while his Mom was dying. None of us can know what effect that had on his play the first half, if any. We may have seen what we saw the last month or two all year if not for what her health was doing to how he approached each game.
by roger13 on Oct 30, 2009 5:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Gomez
I think a case can be made that he is still making progress in the big leagues.
Linedrive% 2007- 15.9% 2008- 17.4% 2009- 19.2%
O-Swing% 2007- 41.4% 2008- 36.8% 2009- 29.9%
Those are positive signs. I think the primary reason for his decline in batting average this season was his bunting for hit rate which was only 22.7% compared with 45.5% the year before. Unlike Young, Gomez performed at above replacement level production, due to his stellar defense. Keeping Kubel in the outfield over Young is an offensive upgrade while not sacrificing defense.
by dontlookback on Oct 30, 2009 11:49 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Positional value
I would argue that a player’s value is independent of which position he plays. Moving Span from CF to a corner decreases his offensive value in relation to his peers but increases his defensive value, basically a wash. Putting the best players on the field is the most important thing.
I’d rate our outfielders Span>Cuddyer>Gomez>Young. Since the twins should be in win now mode, I’d be content with keeping both Gomez and Young in the majors. I’d prefer Young as the 4th outfielder and RH DH.
by Jon Kammerer on Oct 30, 2009 12:05 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
We are supposed to be voting on Gomez and Young, right?
Because if we’re really asking about Span or Gomez…well, sorry, but bye-bye GoGo. :\
by fischean on Oct 30, 2009 12:56 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, Span is one of the core guys now
"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot
by cmathewson on Oct 30, 2009 1:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Fixed the poll
I got home from work and was reading other posts and saw a bit of chatter on Gomez/Young so I started writing this way too late. Thus the laziness when it came to any sort of numbers breakdown and the incorrect name on the poll
Peyton's good but have you ever heard of Jeff George?
by halfchest on Oct 30, 2009 1:37 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I declare shenanigans! Get your brooms!
You can’t “fix” a ballot in mid election! It’s Franken/Coleman all over again! Now it will be at least June until we find who REALLY won.

"Is it normal to wake up in the morning in a sweat because you can't wait to beat another human's guts out?" -Joe Kapp
by less cowbell, more 'neau on Oct 30, 2009 2:27 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
My vote is to keep Gomez
But I’m not sure where to play him. I can see the arguments for putting Gomez in AAA to get him more seasoning. That’s what the Twins should have done this year if they knew Gomez wasn’t going to get any playing time – he won’t develop as a defensive replacement.
But I can also see the argument for keeping Gomez in the majors, because his defense is such an asset. I think he would still improve with regular playing time, though maybe not as quickly as in the minors.
by what_would_gil_thorp_do on Oct 30, 2009 3:47 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Where is this Gomez > Young thing coming from?
I realize he’s better with the glove, but have any of you seen him bat? He’s downright horrible. Young, depsite his bad approach, is far more talented, and in an offense that featured 3 of Tolbert, Punto, Harris, or Cassilla on a daily basis for most of the season, having him in the lineup was a must. Quite frankly, neither were what I’d call good options, and they are both equally horrible.
I personally don’t get where this is coming from, and I don’t agree with the idea that one of these guys is more suited to help us win games than the other. Gomez has value as a pinch runner and a defensive sub. That’s it. But until he can be passable with the bat, he’s useless. Add to it that he’s going to start getting very expensive very soon and to date he’s barely worth the league minimum he’s being paid. He is at least a year out from a “breakout” so to speak. If you are lucky, he hits .250 next season. I’d much rather him learn in AAA where is service time is delayed a year so that when he figures it out, we can benefit more from it. Right now, we are basically throwing money at him, and by the time he gets good, he will be playing for a bigger market.
There are far bigger business decisions that need to be made here. You can bring up a guy like Pridie to be a defensive replacment, and while he isn’t as good as Gomez with the glove, he will be passable with a bat (and might actually be a decent pinch hitting option) and provide a defensive upgrade in late situations. Be smart about this one. It was bad enough losing Santana. It’s going to be a lot worse if the only thing it gives us Rausch and one good year from the corner stone of the deal who ends up playing in a bigger market.
by diehardtwinsfan on Oct 30, 2009 8:27 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Yeah.....
We still have that Santana trade to contend with. More and more it looks like the Twins might’ve been better served with one more year of Johan and two draft picks. I’m sure we could’ve packaged someone other than Mulvey to Arizona for Rauch. Am somewhat curious where Humber will end up.
Young is already more expensive because of his draft contract. It will be curious to see his arbitration numbers down the line…you can only cut a guy 20% and it never seems to happen.
Yes, Gomez, if he spends another season just waffling as a Twin, could become expensive in his last arbitration year. But maybe tradebait, too.
Looking back, whch is SO easy to do now…the Twins needed a different body than Humber, that’s fer sure. Gomez should’ve been back in AAA for 2008. Maybe even part of 2009. Maybe Mulvey also got pushed. Lester/CoCo/Lowrie/masterson and more looks darn enticing, now. Of Hughes/Melkey/two prospects.
Visit www.TwinsCards.com and check out "rosters" to see my collection!
by rosterman on Oct 30, 2009 9:00 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't know if you like Fangraphs, but...
According to that website, although Gomez had an awful bat, he was still worth 0.6 wins over a replacement-level player. Young, on the other hand, had an ok bat, but horrible defense, and he ended up costing the Twins 1.2 wins versus a replacement player. Young isn’t just worse than Gomez, but downright bad to actually be worth negative wins.
Of course, part of the reason for this is position. Young is a corner outfielder, and replacement corner outfielders will either outhit him or outplay him in the field. But Gomez, as a center fielder, has a greater value, as your replacement level CF won’t have quite as much hitting/fielding ability as your replacement corner OF.
Also note – Young’s defense is so bad (-16 runs) that it comes out worse than Gomez’s offense (-14.2 runs).
Of course, this is all only if you buy into Fangraphs, particularly whether you trust UZR as a measure of defensive ability. If you do, Gomez has been more valuable than Young in both the 2008 and 2009 seasons.
by what_would_gil_thorp_do on Oct 30, 2009 9:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wouldn't go that far
It appears that Fangraphs overemphasizes defense in determining value. In addition, I don’t trust their metric. I understand Span rated below average as a RF. I can’t and won’t believe that.
by Alexi Casilla All-Star on Oct 30, 2009 10:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Computers > human eyes
Explaining WAR would take a long time, but bottom line is it’s a very good statistic for measuring value over any veteran or young player that can be plugged in and expected to perform mediocre. (see: Brendan Harris). UZR is very comprehensive, and includes all facets of playing the position including range, (range factor), OOZ plays, etc. and it is adjusted for park dimensions and features. A good fan should use UZR and +/- in tandem when evaluating a player’s defense. If the computers say that Span was below average in RF, then he was below average in RF that year. Those stats may increase as sample size increases (that is a common criticism of UZR). Never completely trust anecdotal experiences and the like when discussing fielding, because there’s so much of it that we simply cannot determine without numbers.
by JTW on Oct 30, 2009 10:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
+1
Better said than me.
by what_would_gil_thorp_do on Oct 30, 2009 10:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
uzr and regression
MGL, the creator of UZR, recomends using weighted UZR plus regression to a scouting report or career numbers to estimate true talent. Span gets +7 and +5 in RF using these methods. UZR is unstable in small samples.
by Jon Kammerer on Oct 31, 2009 9:52 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
UZR = human eyes
Saying that something is comprehensive because they’ve grafted on calculations for a variety of things is a stretch.
Saying that human eyes plus a large number of human estimates of valuations calculated by a computer makes it absolutely so borders on being a religious statement.
by Salty on Oct 31, 2009 12:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You can argue about UZR
but using statistics for proportioning defense compared to offense is absolutely correct. Its not that people don’t realize that Gomez is way better than Delmon defensively, its that they don’t know how much value that brings. Because we can look at offensive stats all day, we tend to overrate the offensive side of things.
Again, you can argue about the methodology of UZR, +/-, etc… but you can’t really argue with the mountains of evidence of the relative importance of defense.
by lookatthosetwins on Nov 4, 2009 1:24 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Span
I think part of that is small sample size – Span had only 39 games in RF, and of those he only started 23. In 2008, where Span played 85 games in RF (77 started), he had a +12.3 UZR/150. So bad numbers for Span can come in because there isn’t enough data to really evaluate his D.
That said, I am with you on being hesitant about how Fangraphs measures defense. I don’t use UZR because I am in love with, but because I think that it is the best that we have at the moment.
by what_would_gil_thorp_do on Oct 30, 2009 10:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree
Span does SEEM to be a better defensive fielder than average, and if I had to take a guess I’d say that if he’s going to play one position and one position only, he’s going to post pretty good defensive numbers there. Nowhere near Franklin Guetierrez numbers, but enough so that he’s a large asset on both sides statistically. We believe essentially what we want to believe, which is why having an unbiased (computers are as unbiased as you can get) source assess value on a number of factors. I agree with you in the sense UZR shouldn’t be used as the end all, be all stat (as none of them should), and that combined with Dewan’s +/-, given a large enough sample size, we can get a good idea of a player’s defensive value.
by JTW on Oct 30, 2009 11:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
There may be no personal biases in executing the lengthy calculations
but there are loads of systemic biases. Actually, designwise there could be personal biases.
by Salty on Oct 31, 2009 12:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Video positions, video equipment, scorer, the original concept that it is based on (static zones), the various formulas that have been grafted on…
by Salty on Oct 31, 2009 11:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
All of those problems might contribute to measurement error,
but “systemic” or “personal” biases are entirely different. UZR certainly isn’t as accurate as we would like it to be (hence the significant measurement error, which matters less the larger the sample), but I don’t know if it’s biased much to favor one player or another (if that’s what you’re alluding to).
And once Hit F/X becomes incorporated – as some teams might already be employing with proprietary metrics – even the measurement error becomes less of an issue (i.e., the metric becomes more precise; requires a smaller sample to achieve the same level of accuracy). But none of us here are familiar enough with the construction of UZR to know what sort of systemic biases exist with the metric and how they might affect valuations of certain players. Any metric involving human performance is going to have such biases, but those biases (assuming that the people who create the metric know what they’re doing) will be much smaller than those relying on the eye alone.
by Mike I on Nov 1, 2009 1:00 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
no, all those can have systemic error
Systemic error and personal biases are two different things. There is certainly a huge possibility of personal bias in UZR though.
The “level of accuracy” of UZR is completely unknown.
If you have a basic understanding of UZR, you know enough to understand where there can be systemic biases. I gave you several off the top of my head.
A metric without human performance can have systemic biases.
The idea that the biases will be smaller than the human eye (and UZR is based on human eye judgements) – and to claim that it will be much smaller – is based on what? Faith? Hope? The desire to speak with authority?
by Salty on Nov 1, 2009 1:45 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think we might have differing definitions of "biases" here
I’m presuming that a “bias” in UZR or other human-performance metrics is something that will cause the metric to constantly measure the performance of certain types of players in a manner inconsistent with those of other players. For example, UZR might grade the performance of CF’s in Fenway Park more harshly than CF’s in other parks (which is a complaint I’ve heard before). Or perhaps the scorer consciously or subconsciously decides he doesn’t like player X and grades the batted ball types differently when it’s hit his way. This is I think what you mean by systemic or personal biases.
As for those biases, I think they are somewhat rare in UZR (and yes, I’m sure they DO exist, as with any metric, even with metrics that don’t deal with human performance). However, I don’t know enough about the intricacies of the metric to say for sure what they are – you just have to place some faith in its MGL (the guy who developed UZR) that he will have recognized and fixed the biases that have arisen.
As for its “level of accuracy” – I don’t think it is all that precise, and MGL would definitely admit that – it has a large margin for error. There’s a lot of room for measurement error here (which is not the same thing as a bias or a confound) – zones and batted ball types might not be labeled perfectly and make up a somewhat crude way of describing the data, the fact that they’re relying on camera angles, etc. But the methods that go into UZR are highly routinized (e.g., carefully considered formulas, trained scorers adhering to a methodical process, inclusion of all relevant data from all 162 games etc.) and that is what makes UZR a more precise and fair evaluator of past performance than the average person watching a game.
Now, if you think that UZR goes wrong somewhere in its formula, or some idea upon which it is predicated is totally off, have at it. But I’d be interested to hear something more specific than “scorer bias” or “video bias” or “static zones don’t work.”
by Mike I on Nov 1, 2009 2:12 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
They're not rare
I just named a handful off the top of my head. You’re making up a scenario about the formulas and the scorers. You don’t know any of that and even if it were true, grafting on formulas to an already weak concept can be considered till the next millenium and it won’t make it good. Seriously, who cares what MGL thinks? Its his little money maker. His explanations for things like 1st base evaluation are laughably bad.
And then you use the word precise…
by Salty on Nov 2, 2009 10:15 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Fine
I’m not going to change your mind and vice versa. (Though I didn’t make the scenario about the scorers up – the process that goes into UZR is pretty public). What sources of information – statistical, anecdotal, or otherwise – do you think are more useful than UZR? This is a sincere question – I’m not trying to be disagreeable.
by Mike I on Nov 2, 2009 12:42 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
You didn't make up the scorer scenario?
What information is available on their training? Better yet, who are they?
Look at every bit of information you have and measure against your own observations. That’s what has always been done.
by Salty on Nov 4, 2009 2:01 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
You can eliminate the human element
But you can minimize it. The point of SABR is not to automate player evaluation, it’s to give evaluators better tools with which to evaluate players. The evaluators must still interpret the data, taking into account statistical anomalies, margins for error and the integration of several disparate measurements from different perspectives (e.g. FIP and OPS against).
Also, upside has not stat as of yet. Talent evaluators look at tools relative to age and experience when making a rough estimate of upside. That is necessarily subjective.
"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot
by cmathewson on Nov 1, 2009 11:48 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Oops, should say you CAN'T eliminate the human element
"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot
by cmathewson on Nov 1, 2009 11:49 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
And the quality of those tools, especially zone ratings, is questionable.
Objective doesn’t equate to good, likewise subjective and bad.
by Salty on Nov 2, 2009 10:18 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
UZR is the best tool we have right now
It’s not perfect. But it’s way better than errors or fielding percentage or other tools that have a higher degree of certainty yet lower degree of usefulness.
The problem is, if you don’t trust stats, how do we talk about players? If it’s just my eyes against yours and we disagree, we will be at an impasse.
"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot
by cmathewson on Nov 2, 2009 1:07 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Best tool?
What in the world is that based on? Faith again? Fielding percentage is worthwhile to consider amongst other data. But the reality is that how good or bad UZR is, is unknown. Its methodology is primitive.
Player rating fluctuate wildly year to year → giant red flag. Player ratings by similar methodologies sometimes vary wildly → giant red flag.
Who trusts stats? Both sides of every argument have been “proved” with stats. And lets be real. Most of the products that are being sold in baseball are not produced by professional statisticians.
Do you think it was a dingy thing to say that there are lies, damned lies and statistics?
by Salty on Nov 4, 2009 2:10 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
You are really
making it sound like all statistics are bad. Well, I guess Adrian Peterson didn’t run for 95 yards yesterday, he probably ran for 94.8 yards. Lets be reasonable!
"Don't take life for granted, because tomorrow isn't promised to any of us." - Kirby Puckett
by 33MorneauMVP on Nov 2, 2009 1:44 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Formulaic vs. Absolute
While I’m not nearly as down on the advanced metrics as Salty is, you’re mischaracterizing his argument quite a bit here. He’s not objecting to stats in general – I’m sure he doesn’t have a problem with home runs, which would be more akin to yards rushing. It’s an absolute counting number, and there’s very little room for ambiguity.
What he has a problem with are stats that involve lots of formulaic activity, especially when mixed with human observation. For a football example, it would be as if there were a stat that attempted to measure the value of Peterson’s pass blocking, for example, based on a combination of observations (quantified, but ultimately subjective) and a formula that attempted to actually assign a value to it. That’s probably a more complex example, but hopefully you can see how that’s easier to object to.
"There are only two things that are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." - Albert Einstein
by BeefMaster on Nov 2, 2009 4:10 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
They're all good to look at and consider
Saying player A or B is a good defender based on UZR is wrong IMO.
Now QB rating…
by Salty on Nov 4, 2009 2:12 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Dome Disadvantage
There’s some evidence that UZR has a negative effect on right fielders in the Metrodome (also left fielders in Fenway) because of the high wall – UZR sees balls off the baggie simply as balls that go 325 feet and aren’t homers, and the RF gets dinged for not converting it into an out.
I like UZR, from what I know of it, but I think it needs pretty huge sample sizes – a whole season even makes me skeptical, and I don’t trust it at all for a guy who’s a part-timer at a position. Span’s career RF numbers might be useful, but a half-season can be awful fluky.
I don’t use UZR because I am in love with, but because I think that it is the best that we have at the moment.
I’d add emphasis to the “we have” – I don’t know whether it’s better than +/- or other metrics, but it’s the only advanced defensive metric I can quickly grab off FanGraphs.
"There are only two things that are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." - Albert Einstein
by BeefMaster on Oct 31, 2009 1:15 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You can bring up a guy like Pridie to be a defensive replacment, and while he isn’t as good as Gomez with the glove, he will be passable with a bat
LOL that is the greatest thing I have seen yet! Thanks for the moment of humor….
"Don't take life for granted, because tomorrow isn't promised to any of us." - Kirby Puckett
by 33MorneauMVP on Oct 30, 2009 10:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
+1
Yah Pridie is straight up awful and can’t even hit in the minors other than one year, he has similar numbers to that of Gomez only he’s doing it at 25 and Gomez did it at 21.
Peyton's good but have you ever heard of Jeff George?
by halfchest on Oct 30, 2009 11:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
-1
Yeah, Pridie is not a good hitter… yet he’s still better at the plate than Gomez… and that should tell you everythign you need to know about Gomez. He’s no longer even an option because the 3B plays in on the bunt every time b/c they know he cannot hit. That’s why he didn’t bunt much this year. And yes, Pridie is decent with the glove. Not Gomez good, but decent. People advocating keeping Gomez up and getting rid of Young make a number of mistakes. They correctly point out the upgrade of 2/3rds of the offense when Gomez and Span are in yet ignore the fact that the same 2/3rds of the outfield would be upgraded with Pridie and Span. Granted, Pridie < Gomez with defense, but given that Gomez’s value right NOW is nothing more than a 4th OFer, you have a huge problem.
We cannot get rid of Young. Just cannot. Maybe we get lucky and pull the woll over Atlanta’s eyes and get Jair Jurjens for Young, but the reality is that we won’t get jack for him, and there’s still plenty of potential. Gomez can be sent down. He’d benefit from it, and we would benefit from having him up when he’s a better player rather than wasting 6 years of service time at him only to see him blossom when he’s no longer in a Twins uniform. One of two things will happen with him. He will either blossom in the last year (maybe 2) with the Twins, or he will get so expensive that we will cut him, at which point he catches on with someone else, puts it together, and we are looking at another Ortiz.
I don’t get the consternation that people have with this decision. It really is a no brainer. You cannot trade either of them for anything of value right now, and neither are very valuable right now. Send Gomez down. Both have a chance at turning into somethign valuable, and neither are being helped in the current setup. Young cannot go down. Gomez can. Both need to play every day. This decision is very easy.
by diehardtwinsfan on Nov 1, 2009 10:33 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Wrong
Yeah, Pridie is not a good hitter… yet he’s still better at the plate than Gomez
I’m sorry but there is just no way you can prove this statement. Pridie has had all of 6 plate appearances in the majors so who knows if he’ll have even a bit of luck against big league pitching. He’s had 2 1/2 yeas at AAA and just keeps getting worse there. He did cut his K’s down a lot this year but he walks as much as Delmon Young and had an OBP of .305 in AAA. I’ll repeat that one more time in AAA. Gomez hit better than that playing as a 21 year old and has a career OBP of .339 in the minors and it only got better each year.
Now I’ll agree with you the simple answer is to send Gomez down but I just don’t know if the Twins have the balls to do that to a guy that’s been up for 3 years. I’d gladly bring Pridie up and use him even less often than we used Gomez so Gomez can play everyday. You’re absolutely right that they both(Gomez and Young) need to play every day to develop and show they’re potential. My favorite solution is what you are saying to send Gomez down and play Young Span Cuddy everyday. I’d consider bringing up Martin or even Winfree instead of Pridie. I know they’re not as good defensively and Winfree especially would leave the Twins without a legitimate backup CF but is a much better hitter than the other two options. I just don’t know if the Twins will do it that way. I guess we can only wait and see.
Peyton's good but have you ever heard of Jeff George?
by halfchest on Nov 2, 2009 11:37 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Chapter 155
The argument has gone on since Span established himself as a regular and narrowed to Young vs. Gomez as soon as Cuddyer showed he should be playing every day.
Here’s my take—I will take Gomez because it improved 2/3 of the outfield defense and that defensive improvement is greater than the difference between Young and Gomez at the plate.
Beyond that, I have come to see Young as a truly flawed young player. His swing at everything approach takes away his power and limits the top end of his on-base ability. Young has some hitting skills, but he isn’t athletic in the field and is not a good base runner. I believe that the best we will see from Delmon is a .750-.780 OPS, with poor baserunning and lousy defense. I don’t think it would matter if Young were in left or right. As a corner OF, that simply isn’t enough production.
Gomez is flawed as well. He hasn’t harnessed his great speed and seems to change his approach at the plate on a pitch-to-pitch basis. The thing that is intriguing about Gomez is that he is one of the fastest five guys in MLB. He has the size and strength to be much more than a slap hitter and he is a fine defender with a strong (erratic) arm. I have seen other posts that say that Gomez should work on bunting and slapping the ball, but what makes his tools special is that if he took a decent swing, he could easily get 50-70 extra base hits. Because Gomez hit RH and takes a huge hack, he doesn’t get out of the box like a slap hitter and doesn’t beat out nearly as many balls as many lefthanded slap hitters (think Ichiro) do. Gomez needs to realize that there are a lot of hits to be had by hitting the ball to the big part of the park—left-center to right-center. He doesn’t have to try to hit every ball 500 ft, just make solid contact and the hits will come. Mix in a number of bunts and perhaps “Go-go” could hit .280 and drive 30+ doubles along with double digit three-baggers and 20 homers.
by Alexi Casilla All-Star on Oct 30, 2009 10:01 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Speed
Sometimes it is hard to quantify speed. I know that when a really fast guy gets on base in a close game, it changes things. Throw overs are made, infielders and outfielders shorten up, so they can make a play on a first-to-third or possible double-play grounder, the pitcher has a more difficult time focusing on the hitter, etc.
I would love to see that Twins have two dynamic base runner/base stealers at the bottom of the order like Gomez and Casilla. Whenever they would get on, they could put real pressure on the team in the field, stealing bases and forcing errors and misplays. They both have the speed to do it, but haven’t demonstrated the on-base skills.
by Alexi Casilla All-Star on Oct 30, 2009 10:11 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
The Big Question....
The Twins move oudoors in 2010. Rain (snow), sunshine, smell from the garbage dump nearby.
Who will play best on the new greens, the walls, the outside uncontrolled air.
The Twins will have limited time in their new space. No winter shagging flies in the outfield.
Plus, a whole new hitting game will also materialize. Homefield advantage…a thing of the past…at least for one season?
Visit www.TwinsCards.com and check out "rosters" to see my collection!
by rosterman on Oct 31, 2009 10:02 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Spending your assets
Priority 1 should be allowing Gomez to play every day, whether in the minors or in the majors. It’s too easy to get a replacement 4th outfielder to replace what he brings off the bench. I think next year is the year to spend Gomez’s option. I’m ready to dump Delmon regardless but I don’t think Gomez is ready yet, he can’t recognize pitches well enough. If Gomez is up he plays every day and the outfield is Span / Gomez / Cuddyer with Delmon splitting time with Kubel at DH.
by DJL44 on Oct 31, 2009 10:08 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Here's the scenario.....
You are the Twins with a current outfield of Cuddyer, Span, Young and Kubel. You hear this young kid, Carlos Gomez, is available…the other team wants Young. Would you make the trade?
Better yet, you have an outfield of Span, Gomez and Cuddyer with Kubel. A team has Delmon Young up for trade and offer him to you for Carlos?
Which do you choose?
Visit www.TwinsCards.com and check out "rosters" to see my collection!
by rosterman on Oct 31, 2009 5:00 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Gomez
All other things equal (contract status, options, service time) I gotta go with Gomez. I really like the idea of having him start this year at AAA to see if he can improve while giving Young a shot full time.
Peyton's good but have you ever heard of Jeff George?
by halfchest on Oct 31, 2009 6:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Gomez
hands down. Has a decent shot to become a good hitter and he already is a premier defensive CF in the AL. I go with Gomez.
"Don't take life for granted, because tomorrow isn't promised to any of us." - Kirby Puckett
by 33MorneauMVP on Oct 31, 2009 9:58 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I voted for Gomez
But it certainly isn’t a no-brainer. As a matter of fact, Delmon was the better player at the end of the regular season (probably because he was getting the ABs). The ceiling I see for Young is about a .300 average with 15-20 homers, playing poor to mediocre defense. He just gives away too many at-bats with first pitch hacks at pitches way out of the strike zone. He is so frequently behind in the count and he strikes out a great deal, not a good combination. That friends is not an impact bat, it is Mickey Hatcher.
Gomez, at the close of the season, was a mess at the plate. I think he was making a visible effort to take some pitches, but the huge swing was making so little solid contact that many pitchers seemed to toy with him. I actually advocate sending him down if he isn’t going to start. He needs to have an approach that works, and his 2009 approach wasn’t working. Sending Gomez down might “break” him—he could lose whatever confidence he has and be useless offensively, but I think it is a gamble worth taking. The tools are there for him to be a very productive offensive player, which combined with his defensive abilities, is a winning player.
by Alexi Casilla All-Star on Nov 1, 2009 1:34 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Ceiling
I think 15-20 homers is too low a ceiling for Delmon. Heck, he had 12 this year and hit like an old lady for the first 2/3 of the season. I think he could certainly be a 30-homer guy, and if he could keep his current BA skills while developing that kind of power, we might be talking about more like a .320 hitter.
I’m not saying that’s more likely than him topping out at .300/15; I’m just saying that if we’re going to talk about ceilings, I see more potential than that.
"There are only two things that are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." - Albert Einstein
by BeefMaster on Nov 1, 2009 10:44 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
His second half is his upside
July: .843 1HR
August: .755 5HR
September: .907 4 HR.
Projecting that over a year, you get .850 with 20 HRs. Considering that his defense is just this side of Manny Ramirez, he still below average. Gomez might not reach his upside, but it is much higher, especially considering his defense.
"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot
by cmathewson on Nov 2, 2009 10:20 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Delmon's upside
How can we know what Delmon’s upside is? I don’t mean this rhetorically (or snarkily). You sound very certain, but I don’t see how any of us can know. He was a number one draft pick, minor league player of the year, etc., so a lot of people believed in him. I know he hasn’t shown good signs of improvement yet, but neither did Span for a long time. What did any of us think Span’s upside was two years ago?
by cooldude on Nov 3, 2009 12:20 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
So true.....
And he shows the emotional side of a player…how stuff going on outside might hurt his play. Plus, does he want to be a star or part of team. Will he listen and TRY new things. Line-up palcement and all. He CAN adjust, but I see him as not enjoying his part-time, on the bubble status with the Twins, batting low in the order, things like that. I’m not sure that his life would be betetr anywhere else (imagine how pumped he would be playing with Pittsburgh or Kansas City). Can he play second-fiddle? Mauer is Joe-Twin. Justin has the fan base. Even Carlos is a fan favorite, something Delmon isn’t. Punto is even hot-and-cold…fans love him because they can hate him, but still love him.
Visit www.TwinsCards.com and check out "rosters" to see my collection!
by rosterman on Nov 3, 2009 1:10 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Young.....
Yes, he should be the perfect 25-30 homer guy and hit around .300. He won’t walk. He’s a mess in the outfield. Happily, the AL has a designated hitter.
But will he do this for this Twins? His best selling point IS that he could do the above, and that might just be the bargaining chip the Twins need to get soemthing in value as a return…like a solid #3 or #4 veteran starter partially on his downsling, and a prospect. Who knows.
The Twins NEED to buy time with Gomez, and not at the major league level. Again, the Twins were slapped when they couldn’t resign Hunter and had no idea that besides Young, they would trade for Gomez and Span would jump into the picture like he did.
Maybe the Twins need to keep Young AND Gomez, and use Span as the bait for a need.
Visit www.TwinsCards.com and check out "rosters" to see my collection!
by rosterman on Nov 2, 2009 10:20 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
??
If you trade Span, then you have a need.
by DJL44 on Nov 2, 2009 12:48 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Do you......
Young in left, Gomez in center, Cuddyer in right….Kubel at DH/4th outfielder. Bring up Martin or Winfree as backup.
Sure, you lost the leadoff guy of the past two years…but play Gomez everyday and see what you got.
But…to back up…is Span more of a keeper, then Gomez or Young, at this point?
Visit www.TwinsCards.com and check out "rosters" to see my collection!
by rosterman on Nov 2, 2009 6:21 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yes
without any doubt he is. Sure I guess just about any guy is available depending on the haul you get for him but as of right now Span is nearly untouchable for the Twins. He’s easily a top 5 probably even better than that leadoff guy and he plays good defense at all 3 outfield positions. Gomez and Delmon are not near the hitters that Span already is and he’s a much better defender than Delmon. I really don’t even see trading Span as an option unless you’re completely overwhelmed and I don’t see someone making a ridiculous push for him.
Peyton's good but have you ever heard of Jeff George?
by halfchest on Nov 2, 2009 7:07 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Span's a core guy
He was one of two players in the top five in all of Jesse’s offensive categories. You can guess who the other guy is. Also, he’s the first true lead-off hitter since Knoblauch. Those guys are really hard to develop.
"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot
by cmathewson on Nov 2, 2009 10:54 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I would like to argue this point
Shannon Stewart did an admirable job in the leadoff spot for the Twins in his 4 years in Minnesota. Stewart was the last good leadoff hitter the Twins had before Span.
"Don't take life for granted, because tomorrow isn't promised to any of us." - Kirby Puckett
by 33MorneauMVP on Nov 2, 2009 11:14 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Fair enough
But I wouldn’t call Stewart a pure leadoff hitter. He would have been an ideal second place hitter. But he didn’t walk much or take a lot of pitches. His OBP was driven by average. Also, I’d say he had about a season and a half of quality and two and a half seasons of below average play, mostly because of his foot injuries.
"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot
by cmathewson on Nov 3, 2009 10:53 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I trade Gomez
I keep Young
I package Casilla (best-friend) with Gomez
Deolis Guerra = Daniel Cabrera ?
I tend to think so
by SteveHoffmanSlowey on Nov 5, 2009 8:08 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
I trade Young
keep Gomez…Gomez right now has the higher upside in my mind. Best defense of any of our outfielders and a decent shot to become a decent hitter.
Young may become a good hitter (though he is still just a second half hitter…look at his career second half vs. first half splits), but he will always be a bad defender.
Gomez stays, Casilla/Delmon go, Perkins goes…
"Don't take life for granted, because tomorrow isn't promised to any of us." - Kirby Puckett
by 33MorneauMVP on Nov 5, 2009 11:18 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
looks like I win
;)
Deolis Guerra = Daniel Cabrera ?
I tend to think so
by SteveHoffmanSlowey on Nov 6, 2009 5:12 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

by 















