Odds are, you know Evan Longoria is pretty good. He’s just 23, but he’s already made his mark on the American League with a stellar rookie season, and he’s followed it up with a strong start to the 2009 season. It wouldn’t be that controversial to call Longoria the best young player in the American League.
I’m here to say we can take the word young out of the previous sentence. Evan Longoria is the best player in the American League. He’s not that far behind Albert Pujols for the title of best player in baseball.
6 months ago
philkid3
19 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
Through is first 637 PAs, Longoria's WAR is about in line with an average season by Albert Pujols.
That’s a very, legitimately awesome stat. He’s kind of great.
That said, what is the sample size before someone can definitively be called the best in the league?
by philkid3 on May 9, 2009 4:40 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I was part of that FanGraphs comment riot
However, only because I don’t really think that you can compare a guy with ~600 at bats to the best player in the game. Especially, because a good portion of his value is tied up in the fact that his career UZR/150 is 20.5. With all of the error bars in UZR + the small sample size factor, I think it is premature to call him a +20 run defender. Also, his .395 wOBA is the majors so far is powered by a .338 BABIP, which does seem a little high.
He’s a great player no doubt, but you shouldn’t use 1 seasons worth of data to say that he is a 8 WAR payer.
St. Louis Cardinals... defying win expectancy since 2008
by vivaelpujols on May 9, 2009 5:47 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I think you can compare someone with 600 PA to the best player in the game. . .
. . . if the stat in question is comparable between the two.
In this case, it is.
by philkid3 on May 9, 2009 6:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes
but 1 seasons worth of data doesn’t tell us much about Longoria’s true talent level.
St. Louis Cardinals... defying win expectancy since 2008
by vivaelpujols on May 9, 2009 6:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe not, but that's beside the point.
Which is that so far he has put up a WAR in his first 637 PA similar to the best player in baseball on average.
Small sample size or not, it’s still true.
by philkid3 on May 9, 2009 6:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
And you can say he's an 8 WAR player so far.
Because he has been.
by philkid3 on May 9, 2009 6:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
But that doesn't mean that he will continue to be
St. Louis Cardinals... defying win expectancy since 2008
by vivaelpujols on May 9, 2009 6:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Longoria's career Minor League BABIP: .337
So .338 doesn’t seem a little high to me.
by philkid3 on May 9, 2009 6:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Minor league BABIP's are always high due to the quality (or lack there of) of minor league defenses
St. Louis Cardinals... defying win expectancy since 2008
by vivaelpujols on May 9, 2009 9:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
But as he improves as a player, is it not logical to imagine his ability to hit unfieldable balls increases?
by philkid3 on May 10, 2009 12:00 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Here is simple example
Pujols in his career has had 20.0% LD, 20.2% HR/FB, 39.0% FB and 41.0% GB. His career BABIP is .322.
Longoria in his career has had 20.0% LD, 20.8% HR/FB, 42.0% and 39.0% GB. His career BABIP is .337.
So, Longoria’s BABIP is 15 points higher than Albert’s, despite almost exactly the same batted ball distribution (he actually has hit slightly more fly balls, which fall in for hits less than grounders). Unless he is able to do something that even the best hitter in the game can’t do, only luck explains his BABIP.
St. Louis Cardinals... defying win expectancy since 2008
by vivaelpujols on May 10, 2009 1:15 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Manny Ramirez has a pretty similar profile to that as well.
But a .345 career BABIP. Manny that lucky, too? Nick Markakis has a similar profile other than a sizably higher GB% and has a .336 career BABIP.
I’m not buying it. Not based on just comparing him to Pujols. Just because he hits line drives and ground balls at the same rate doesn’t mean he hits ground balls and line drives that are just as easy to field.
by philkid3 on May 10, 2009 1:56 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Either way, it is too early to tell if Longoria's BABIP is legitamite
~600 at bats isn’t enough to accurately gauge a players trends. He may really be this good of a hitter, or he may have gotten lucky, but it is too early to tell.
The thing you should keep in mind is that sustaining a .337 BABIP is very rare. Most guys who do that either have great speed and get a lot of infield hits (like Ichiro), or hit an inordinate ammount of line drives (like Michael Young). Longoria, doesn’t do either, so it would be very unique for him to be able to sustain such a hihg BABIP.
St. Louis Cardinals... defying win expectancy since 2008
by vivaelpujols on May 10, 2009 4:22 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree that it's too early to be certain.
One way or the other.
by philkid3 on May 10, 2009 6:09 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Also, do you have an article on the statistical correlation you could share?
I’m actually having a much easier time find players who improved their BABIP once graduating than those who didn’t.
by philkid3 on May 10, 2009 12:03 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
According to minorleaguesplits
which isn’t perfect but w/e, Longoria’s minor league BABIP is actually higher when you neutralize for park & luck.
by Gina on May 10, 2009 12:10 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think Cameron did a pretty good job defending himself here, mostly:
You guys are obfuscating the entire point of the post with side arguments that have nothing to do with anything?
As stated in the post, Longoria has been as valuable to the Rays in his first "season" of major league baseball as Pujols is to the Cardinals in a typical Pujols season. That statement of value was put there as a reference point for people to understand just how awesome Longoria has been since getting called up to the majors.
The comments that followed comparing his walk rate and selectivity at the plate to Pujols miss the entire point of the post. I never even got close to saying that Longoria is like Pujols, so differentiating them based on skillset differences is pointless.
To use your analogy, this is like me saying that this car is worth $100, which makes it more valuable than any other on the block, and then people arguing with me because the car is red and that other valuable car down the street is black.
There was no effort or intention to say that Longoria is anything like Pujols. The point was that Longoria was as valuable in his 151 games of major league service as Pujols generally is in a full season. Point of references aren’t comparisons.
This should be a pretty easy thing to grasp.
Unfortunately, it still comes with his trademark “tact.”
by philkid3 on May 9, 2009 6:47 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
BtB on Facebook
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
