Robbie

by Travis G on Sep 30, 2008 6:14 AM EDT in Analysis Comment 21 comments

There are some that want him traded while some retain hope that he will blossom into a great hitter. I'm in the latter camp and here's why:

- He maintained the same line drive rate that he's had during his career (slightly higher actually, 19.4 % vs. 19.1 % career).

- His BABIP was uncharacteristically low (.286 vs. .323 career mark). Factoring that in with the line drive rate indicates that he was rather unlucky this season.

- He hit less grounders and more flyballs this year, which usually leads to greater power (though it has yet to show up).

- After Cano was benched/changed his stance, he hit .413/.431/.587 in his last 51 plate appearances (for what it's worth).

- He still plays quality defense. While his Zone Rating was below average, his Range Factor and FRAA (Fielding Runs Above Average) were above.

- And perhaps the biggest factor of all: he'll be just 26 next season, still not in the (historically speaking) prime of his career.

So what (if anything) should be done about him?

PS: Mo decided to have shoulder surgery (which will occur on October 6th) rather than cortisone shots, and is expected to be ready for spring training.

[image via i.a.cnn.net]

0 recs | Comment 21 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

I posted about this a few weeks ago

Also don’t forget his % of flyballs that are homeruns was about 5% lower than his career average. Again, just bad luck.

by 3460kuri on Sep 30, 2008 8:46 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

his defense

was worse this year. FRAA and range factor are poor stats compared to the zone ratings (because ZRs use play-by-play hit-location information). historically he’s been about league-average, though.

Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.

by Sky Kalkman on Sep 30, 2008 12:45 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

you know a helluva lot

about SABR stats. is RZR the one where they have people at every game deciding whether a ball in play is playable or not? Or maybe that’s Dewan’s +/- .

by Travis G on Sep 30, 2008 4:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

both STATS and BIS record where balls were hit, to within small zones on the field. basic zone ratings consider all the little zones within a player’s area of responsibility (defined as all the little zones where balls are turned into outs at least half the time league-wide) as a player’s Zone. zone rating is the percentage of balls into that big Zone turned into outs.

RZR is BIS’ zone rating. STATS zone rating is available at ESPN and CNNSI. Justin compiles them both and converts into runs, which is a nice unit since you can compare it to offense. updated through September 5th right now, but I’m guessing there will be an end-of-season update in a few days

http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=pfk_WuYpfdux2FC_hs6ROEQ&gid=1

Dewan’s +/- (and MGL’s UZR and Dave Pinto’s PMR) are very similar, except they tackle each little zone separately and adjust for batter handedness, ballpark, etc. I would trust Dewan’s +/- over RZR, but i’m not sure it’s better than an average of the two basic zone ratings, because then you’re using two different companies’ sets of data, which is nice.

Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.

by Sky Kalkman on Sep 30, 2008 5:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

If the right offer

comes for him, I say take it. Alfonso Soriano was better than Robbie (IMO), but he was expendable. I think the position should be “defense first” anyways.
IF Robbie becomes the player some think he will, resign him when he becomes a free agent. Until then, make it known he’s available for the right player.

by ilBrutto on Sep 30, 2008 2:40 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Keep him ... unless

Second base needn’t be a power position. We need someone who can dependably play the field and not fall asleep. I’m not knocking Cano, but he’s wearing the pinstripes and playing next to Derek Jeter. If that’s not enough motivation I don’t know what is… If the right offer came down the pike for a frontline cf, or starter, I’d pull the trigger. Cano is certainly replaceable even if he hasn’t hit his prime.

"Baseball is the background music of my life." -George Will

by Ronster22 on Sep 30, 2008 4:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

No

A good bat at second base is a HUGE asset, more than a good bat at first base or the outfield.

The real strength of the Yankees since 1996 has been having significantly better than average bats at up-the-middle defensive positions – catcher, shortstop, second base, and center. The team would be foolish to trade Cano this offseason unless it was for young, frontline pitching (Matt Cain is not a young front line pitcher).

by 3460kuri on Sep 30, 2008 4:40 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

i respectfully disagree

about Matt Cain.

he’s just 23, already proven he can stay healthy (unlike IPK and Hughes) and has a 118 ERA+ at that young age. his stuff is very good (93+ mph avg. FB). i would trade Cano for him, but SF would need more.

by Travis G on Sep 30, 2008 5:03 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs

Cano and Hughes

for Cain? Think that’s enough for SF? I’d do it in a heartbeat.

by BrianByron on Oct 2, 2008 5:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

i'm honestly not sure Cain is that much better than Hughes

his flyball tendencies are being helped a lot by AT&T park and pitchign in the NL pulls down ERA by about half a run.

Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.

by Sky Kalkman on Oct 3, 2008 2:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

The issue is that

Cano is one of the few real Yankee trading chips, even after the off-year. Given the team’s needs, I wouldn’t be surprised if they moved him for, say, a CF who plays good defense and has good power, or a proven young starter. Orlando Hudson’s on the market, so he’s an option if Cano is moved.

by 0157H7 on Oct 1, 2008 12:34 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Let's trade Cano

for Josh Hamilton!

by Raven King on Oct 1, 2008 1:14 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

if a trade was made

i wouldn’t mind. i love cano and i think he’s been unfairly knocked, but if we let abreu walk, then our outfield might need strengthening if gardner/melky can’t play or are traded. and then maybe go for matt kemp? or strong starting pitching. with that quote about sabathia, i’m really worried about who we can sign in the offseason to bolster the rotation.

the yankees have a ton of options this season, and whether they want to go into rebuilding mode will determine what they do.

by tropmug on Oct 2, 2008 12:51 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

A player's prime years

are 25-29, according to Bill James, who has, obviously, studied the facts for a long time.

Attribution here (about half way down the article):

http://www.nj.com/mets/index.ssf/2008/04/david_wright_and_bill_james.html

I know the CW is 28-32, but I think that’s a myth that’s been spread by agents looking to maximize contracts for their clients.

by BrianByron on Oct 2, 2008 5:33 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

'cw'?

Bill James is a stat genius, i dont want to knock him.

i did my own study of peak/prime and found it to be 27-31 (meaning the best players from year to year are typically in that age range), with the absolute best years being 27-29.

prime also differs slightly by handedness as well.

James probably isn’t wrong, but my independent study shows what i believe prime to be. i highly doubt you’d see better seasons from 25-year-olds than 31-year-olds (in general).

by Travis G on Oct 2, 2008 9:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

no, but 25 year olds are much less likely to be given the chance

i highly doubt you’d see better seasons from 25-year-olds than 31-year-olds (in general)

Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.

by Sky Kalkman on Oct 3, 2008 2:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

are you agreeing with me then?

yeah, the older guys probably do get more PT.

so should i calculate using a rate stat (like OPS+)?…

just did a quick and dirty study: since 1973, the top 10 OPS+ guys at age 25 fall between 161-177.
age 26: 165-213
age 30: 163-198
age 31: 176-200

so maybe age 26 should be included, but age 30 & 31 clearly produce better seasons (at least among the elite players) than age 25 players. again, just a quick and dirty study.

by Travis G on Oct 3, 2008 3:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I would say

that both studies indicate that a player over 30 is on the way down, not in the middle of his prime, as is generally thought. (CW=conventional wisdom.) Especially now that we’re out of the steroid era (hopefully), this is how we should look at player trajectory.

So, someone like ARod, for example, most likely will never again have a season like 2007. His numbers should slowly decrease from here on out.

And as we look at FAs, this should all be factored in.

by BrianByron on Oct 5, 2008 2:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

players rarely follow smooth curves

there’s a lot of variability in performance. so while a player’s true talent should slowly and consistently decline, they tend to have large swings in actual production. for example, Moose in 2007 and 2008. given, say, five more healthy “youngish” seasons, it’s a decent bet that ARod comes close to his 2007 numbers in one of them. it’s only when you combine players do you see smooth curves in actual performance.

Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.

by Sky Kalkman on Oct 8, 2008 3:16 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

just because there are more great seasons by 31 year olds than 25 year olds does not mean 31 is a peak year and 25 isn't

there are a TON more 31 year olds in the league to possibly put up great seasons. and there are many more crappy 31 year olds than 25 year olds. teams are risk-averse with young players, not given them a chance to play until they force their way up. many productive seasons are wasted in the minors.

what you need to do is follow every player throughout their career and note how their performance changes year to year. studies like that have been done. peak ages are about 25-29. here’s one: http://www.tangotiger.net/aging.html

Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.

by Sky Kalkman on Oct 8, 2008 3:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

like i said

my study was ‘quick and dirty’, not the novel Tango wrote. with all due respect, he used players from 1919-98, but i used 1973-present. isn’t it possible that peaks last longer in the modern era bc of better physical training and medical advances?

by Travis G on Oct 8, 2008 5:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs