The Ruben Tejada Experiment is Over, It’s Time to #FreeWilmer: Part III
By: Brian Mangan
This is the third and final installment of my #FreeWilmer series. I hope you have enjoyed it so far.
- In Part I, we explained that Ruben Tejada has been a huge liability at the plate this year (161st out of 162 major leaguers in slugging %) and ranked 22nd out of 28 shortstops in wins above replacement (WAR).
- In Part II, we explained that Wilmer Flores is a former Top 100 prospect who has nothing left to prove in Triple-A (batting .321/.360/.543 with 28 HR and 143 RBI in 162 games) and that his offensive contribution would outweigh any of his defensive problems.
http://thereadzone.com/2014/07/30/the-ruben-tejada-experiment-is-over-its-time-to-freewilmer-part-iii/
34 comments:
Hey Mack. A bit of a broken record from me, but I am all for that. Flores to start, and Tejada as back up. I think Flores will hit like Murphy, and would make the line up quite dangerous. Hitting creates momentum. The trade off with more porous defense is one I'd accept. And mitigate by having Tejada used liberally as a late defensive replacement.
Anyone who agrees with the article and the comment above have not seen Wilmer Flores play. Not in the minors, apparently not in the majors either.
Look, Chris Young and Daniel Murphy have both literally caused losses from their defense this year. As in, the game literally would not have been a loss if it weren't for their incompetence. If you want to look at it further, both have cost more than that from run differential in the field.
The same will hold true for Wilmer Flores. You can not--I repeat CAN NOT--play an infield with three poor defenders (Murphy, Duda two of the worst at their positions) with a ground ball staff and expect to win.
Failure to understand the above is a failure to understand how baseball works at a fundamental level. It's not "saber-wizardry" I've been accused of many times. It's simple, it's proven, and it's logical. You don't build a team around contact ground ball pitchers then throw three piss-poor defenders in the infield. No matter if they score runs.
"The bar is not high for Wilmer to be a better option at shortstop than Ruben Tejada. To do so, he’ll simply have to play -10 UZR/150 defense (essentially Hanley Ramirez defense) and hit only about as well as Manny Machado.
This is what bothers me about the article: Use of faulty math to assume a standard then assume a different standard above what that player has performed to in the *minors* (including the PCL) to just *maybe* match Ruben Tejada. Oh he only has to hit like Manny Machado? No problem. Only play defense like Hanley Ramirez? No problem. Let's ask Jon Niese to throw a fastball like David Price while we're at it. Hey if he does that, he could start opening day next year!
The whole thing is silly to me.
More faulty math: The author uses UZR (an inherently flawed metric, as I have discussed on here many times) from a microscopic sample to suggest Wilmer Flores can handle the position. Yet the author ignores over half a decade of minor league evidence proving otherwise. Not just statistically, but through coach's moves and comments, and scout opinion. The same scouts that praise him for his bat, by the way.
This is full of logical fallacies and mathematical inconsistencies, the worst of which is cherry-picking that which makes the argument fit the thesis.
You have to look at the bigger picture. Is Ruben Tejada an above average shortstop? No. Do I want someone better there? Yes. Is he the best option right now? Yes. I've proven that multiple times.
Stephen,
Don't lump Lucas in with Murph and Flores as a defender. He may not be Keith Hernandez, but he's not Adam Dunn, either. He plays the position fairly, and is getting better. He fumbles a little bit, but name me a player that doesn't make a bobble every now and then. Aside from that, I agree with you completely. Put Flores at SS, and you might as well hang a badminton net from 2nd to 3rd for defense. Tejada's defensive stats read quite well, and his offense has improved. Yes, he had a bad couple of months at the start of the season, but so did a lot of the other starters. People were ready to replace Grandy, and where would we be now without him? The problem is not necessarily Tejada, but that we need someone to lengthen the lineup. We just don't have a position for Flores.
I promised Brian I would cross promote his articles on the Mets on The Red Zone
In return, he promised to write for us.
That hasn't happened.
This is the 3rd time I have liked to his Mets posts on his site... he's written nothing for us.
I have far lived up to my bargain.
As of this morning, I have removed him as a writer here and wish him well.
Steve from Norfolk,
You won't find a bigger Lucas Duda fan on here. Ask Mack…I've been talking and writing about him since 2008. I have long called him the future at first base for the Mets but he is not a plus defender. If he ever improves to being even league average, that will be a huge victory for him and the Mets. Right now, he is well below average.
Sure, he's still learning the position but bottom line is that his defense matters much less at first than any of the other three positions on the diamond. Those other three NEED to have plus defenders.
Also, he's going to get a lot of balls thrown to him. I don't care if the range is poor as long as he's digging throws out--something he's shown a bit of a natural skill of doing.
He'll be fine. Wright is fine. Tejada (or Chris Owings--the guy I've been clamoring for for over a year now) will be fine. Murphy should probably be traded and reports on Herrera are strong.
Wilmer has no right playing on the left side of any major league infield. He'd be *okay* at second but no better than Murph.
Mack, I can understand the frustration.
To his credit, at least Mangan attempted to use concrete and empirical evidence to support his thesis which is something few amateur writers do. However, his logic is faulty and I don't think he understands how UZR, projections, or the infield defense-pitching relationship works.
What mythical number would represent "we're out of it" and signal the beginning of the time to experiment?
Even if Wilmer Flores is not the long term answer at SS, it behooves the team to give him an extended look to see how his BAT plays in the majors. If he shows he can do 75% of what he did in the minors, then trading either him or Murphy becomes viable. Right now you can't trade Murphy because you don't know if Flores would hit and you can't trade Flores because no one knows if he can hit.
Once the team reaches, for example, 10 games out in the wildcard, they should bench Tejada and let Flores play, defense be damned, just to see if he can hit when he doesn't worry about getting benched the day after he drives in 6 runs. If he hits, great, then you have options. If he doesn't, Murphy's agent will be doing cartwheels.
IMO Duda has played surprisingly good D at 1B so far. Murphy makes up for his lack of range with his bat (leading the league in hits).
But Flores would have to hit like Tulo to make up for the porous MIF that he'd create. It would be an unbearable situation for our young pitchers.
We can go with Murphy OR Flores, but not both.
As for Ruben, there's no question about the stats you gave. But he's made a number of brilliant plays this year that have saved runs and cut short rallies. He's fine turning DPs, and he's among the top SSs in MLB in fewest Errors (5) all season. He also is near the top in OBP by SSs, and works long counts ( an under-rated stat).
Judging strictly by BA and Slg gives a very distorted picture. We got to 4 WSs with SSs named Harrelson, Santana and Ordonez. Check their numbers and Ruben doesn't look quite so bad.
Karma -
I don't think the Mets will charge anything about their lineup while they actually are in the wild card race.
Maybe DFA Abreu replaced by either Kirk or den Dekker
Ruben Tejada is going to end this year as the Mets SS
Bill Metsiac, thank you for the rational response. You do have to look at the big picture. Frankly, if the rest of the team were a murderer's row, no one would care. The problem is you have an elite staff (all ERAs and FIPs in the low to mid 3s is elite by anyone's standards) and only one pitcher with a (barely) winning record.
So fans look at the worst offenders offensively and see Tejada. Why they don't see Eric Young Jr., Chris Young, Anthony Recker, or Travis d'Arnaud as culprits is beyond me. Tejada has been worth about as much offensively as all of those players.
With Lagares, d'Arnaud and Tejada, right now they provide enough to the team in defense, speed, pop, and on-base ability to warrant their spots on the rosters. But, with them in there and learning against major league pitching, the team just isn't going to score runs.
I have one simple fix for the team and it's replacing Chris Young (or Abreu) with Matt den Dekker and starting him in left every day. No, he's not a great hitter but he's a lot better than either Young and his defense would just add wins to this team.
Want a quick fix? Look at left. That's where fan's attention should be--not short. I'll write a post on that dictating why.
Stephen -
Great minds...
I just wrote about den Dekker for tomorrow
I'm on board with den Dekker. I agree with Reese on his logic for Flores at SS...except like any experiment, it does not have to be permanent. Seeing how well Flores hits is a key to trading him or Murphy.
Ruben is not the future and they've surprisingly stayed close in the race, so perhaps now is not the time. They're on a roll. If they regress to what Reese indicates is his experiment trigger point, let the experiment begin.
Reynolds had a slump for several games and has come roaring back. He could be considered for a SS experiment too. I imagine his D is also less than Ruben's but he also is demonstrating rapid growth towards a much superior bat.
Let me add that if Flores got to play 150 games starting tomorrow (a hypothetical season, at his current age), I think he'd have 35 doubles, 15 HR, 70 RBI, and .270. Start him as soon as (if) they slide out of contention. And let Ruben be a late inning replacement, minimizing defensive deficiencies. Doesn't work, switch back.
Dekker absolutely - major strides. Great glove. Deserves a real shot. Hope Mack agrees tomorrow!
I think the problem I also have with Flores is doubts that he's that great of a hitter. I see a guy with a profile similar to Daniel Murphy…270-.290 I agree with, doubles, few homers, no speed, lots of singles, very few walks, low-OBP and BABIP-raised OBP. It's obviously still better than Ruben, but not enough runs to make up for those that would cross from his poor defense. If this were Hanley we're talking about, sure. Flores isn't Hanley.
I really do think you can actually capitalize on Flores and trade him (or could have, before 4 PM today) but I understand the rationality for getting him big league at bats before that happens.
Personally I would have traded Murphy for Giolito, started Flores at second and added another top-20 prospect to the system.
Giolito for Murphy would have made my brother Steve ecstatic. He'd simply say "DO IT TODAY!"
I'll bow out of this discussion by saying that acknowledging Flores is in Vegas, where Murphy never played, he has hit much better than Murph did in the minors at the same age. I think long term, Wilmer will hit better. But that is guesswork on my part.
Fyi
according to espn online stats
Tejada's fielding % is .987
Flores majors fielding % is .986
Fielding percentage is just about useless and even if you want to look into it, Flores has not accumulated enough innings to make the sample size significant.
Why is it that stats people don't like the result of are useless?
And I believe the entire point of the link is that Flores NEEDS more playing time so he can accurately be assessed.
Tejada is a known........nothing special.
Mets management don't and apparently never planned to compete in the post season this year.
So........the Mets foolishly devalued Flores as a prospect in the way he was handled this year.
By playing him over Tejada they could have at least been able to evaluate or show off his offensive capability on the major league level.
Could have been able to better decide if he could take over for Murphy at 2b or establish as a strong trade chip.
Flores treatment this year is completely nonsensical.
Another example of poor decision making
there was a CFer once who the Mets never had any intention of playing there, until someone else was injured and he got an opportunity... his name was Juan Lagares.
Sit Ruben. Give Wilmer the chance he deserves for the remainder of the season.
bob, I would say fielding percentage is useless even if Tejada had a 1.000 FP and Flores' was .920. It says nothing of range, arm, double play turning ability, footwork, or anything really related to defense. It says "This player has messed up this many times". Frankly, I'd rather a guy mess up 15 times a year and make 80 extra plays than a guy mess up 0 times and not make those other 80 plays. Wouldn't you? Does this make sense now? Can we drop the fielding percentage nonsense?
Mack, we did know about Juan Lagares, though. At least you and I did. We've been talking about him for some time. I saw him in Double-A and he was hitting the crap out of the ball and playing an excellent left field (Matt den Dekker was playing an excellent center field at that point). I said he would make the team out of spring training last year (he didn't, but I was close) and i always thought he would be good. Not this good, but good.
Flores is a completely different story. You're asking a guy to play shortstop who isn't a shortstop. It's like saying Campbell should get a shot there. Or Lagares should be moved back to shortstop. Or Wright should shift to SS and Murphy should move to third. All of those ideas are silly because none of them are shortstops. Neither is Wilmer Flores. It's an idea that really needs to die.
Or Mack, take this example as it's much more relevant: There once was a Mets player with a good eye, power potential, and a could-be middle-order bat the Mets needed. The Mets foolishly tried to make him an outfielder and the team, as well as the player trying to adjust, struggled mightily. As soon as that player was shifted to his natural position, both he and the team took off. That player is Lucas Duda.
You don't play players out of position. It's bad for them and it's bad for the team. Especially a team built around pitching. Especially a team built around ground ball pitching. You HAVE to turn the maximum amount of balls in play into outs to be successful.
I am not saying Ruben Tejada is the future. Short of him figuring out how to hit better, I hope he isn't. I'm saying *Flores is not the answer*. Have I convinced anyone yet or am I just yelling into the wind?
Well Stephen
I guess all I can say is that obviously Collins and Alderson agree with you.
Not me.
Bob,
Fielding percentage is pretty meaningless unless you take range factor into account. Fielding % tells how many balls you field anginst how many you don't out of the balls you can reach. Range factor tells how far your reach is;i.e how much ground you can cover. Flores' major league RF/9 (range factor over 9 innings)for SS is 3.71. Tejada's is 4.65. ML average is 4.27. So, Tejada covers approximately 20% more ground than Flores, while having about the same success rate fielding balls in play. By the way, his RF/9 is 2nd in the league. The only position where Flores' RF/9 is above league average is 3B. We saw that last year, when he did a very good job while filling in for Wright.
Just for reference, Flores has a total of 185 ML AB's. His OPS is .539.
bob, both of those guys are good at what they do. Both make mistakes and aren't perfect, but there's a reason Ruben Tejada gets the most innings at short. He's simply the best (only?) option right now, as I've discovered in my research.
Look if we had Lindor in our system, this would be a moot point. It really would. There's just nothing out there that makes any sense. I would be fine opening up the wallet for Hanley this off-season but I doubt that happens. He's going to be crazy pricey and the Dodgers won't let him go elsewhere anyway.
just healthy banter among friends
I'm sorry Stephen
I simply cannot agree with how Flores has been treated given this teams circumstances.
If they were competing for and committed to being a playoff team THIS YEAR, I would agree with you.
This year's Mets team however have devalued its asset in Flores.
Nonsensical decision.
It's not nonsensical. He's blocked. He also doesn't have a position. He's also still just 22 years old. That's still really young for a major league-ready prospect. In fact, I could make the case that the ludicrous notion that he could handle shortstop has decreased his value--not his "treatment" this year.
Look at it this way--you play him at second, third, and short in Vegas all year. He puts up video game numbers and doesn't suck in the field. You're telling me some team wouldn't drool over that?
Also, I have a problem with the entire ideology. Why aren't you banging on about him replacing Murphy? Second and first are the only positions he can handle (third obviously isn't happening and he can't handle SS) and Duda isn't getting moved. Murphy, though, should have (should be?) traded and Wilmer is like…the same player. Same average-sustained OBP, limited but present power, limited speed, poor defender, big, clunky, but younger and a hell of a lot cheaper. The right move is trading Murphy and playing Flores. WHY IS NO ONE TALKING ABOUT THAT? PLEASE EXPLAIN THIS TO ME.
Think of this like a GM: Flores is going to cost 500k next year. Murphy will cost 9 million. You can have an identical infield for 8.5 million less that's the same defensively.
Or we can do it your way, save no money, and have an infield that's exponentially worse for a pitching staff who needs them to be good.
Answer me honestly: Which would you prefer? I will await your response, bob gregory.
Stephen
Flores range factor at SS on the major league level this year (even with out being able to have steady playing time to play a position he hasn't played in years)......
Is very much in line with many of Derek Jeter's range factor/9 at the end of his seasons
And JJ Hardy's rookie year
And some of H. Ramirez's yrs
And most of Jed Lowrie's years
And Brad Miller last year
And J. Segura's rookie year
And Ian Desmond's 2012 & 2014 seasons
And X. Bogaerts S's experiences as a Redsock
And J. Profar's experiences as a Ranger
And Y. Escobar this year
And S. Drew's 2012 season
And close to J. Reyes last year
The reason nobody mentions those things is because the Mets "brain trust" in all of their wisdom have chosen to bring Flores up stating he would play shortstop without making any real effort to trade Murphy.
My issue is with Flores just sitting on the bench collecting splinters in his butt.
Since Murphy is still on the team playing just about every day.......
Shortstop is the only place left for Flores to play.
22 yr old prospects NEED to play regularly.
Every time he was brought to the majors he should have been playing regularly
Or he should have been kept in AAA
That is the nonsense I refer to when I stress the nonsensical decisions in Flores's handling this year
I understand. Most of that I can get behind and I certainly agree that Wilmer needs to be playing every day. The only issue I have with the research (which is good and I appreciate it) is sample size errors. Wilmer hasn't played enough innings to know what his real UZR expectation should be. Tejada has. As for the Jeter comparisons, he's the oft-gone to player for someone who committed a lot of errors who eventually won a gold glove. However, Jeter is a far better defender than Flores. He has the footwork and speed that Wilmer will never be able to have and much much softer hands. Both have good arms.
Gotta turn the lights off at this point but thanks for a good discussion here. I have a post on Ruben tomorrow finishing up my "shortstoption" series. Would like to read your thoughts on there tomorrow.
Thanks
I look forward to enjoying your article tomorrow
Enjoy your night
Post a Comment