Pat Burrell v. Raul Ibanez - By the Offensive Numbers
by David S. Cohen on Dec 12, 2008 4:58 PM EST
53 comments
It's clear that Pat Burrell and Raul Ibanez are awful left fielders. By John Dewan's metrics, they were the two worst left fielders in baseball for the last two years. So let's compare them where any difference might show up - in their offensive stats:
| Burrell | Ibanez | |
| Age | 32 | 36 |
| 2008 OBP | 0.367 | 0.358 |
| 2008 SLG | 0.507 | 0.479 |
| 2008 HR | 33 | 23 |
| 2008 RBI | 86 | 110 |
| Career OBP | 0.367 | 0.346 |
| Career SLG | 0.485 | 0.472 |
| Career HR/162 | 31 | 21 |
| Career RBI/162 | 103 | 93 |
| 2008 OBP v. lefties | 0.406 | 0.368 |
| 2008 SLG v. lefties | 0.545 | 0.497 |
| 2008 OBP v. righties | 0.351 | 0.353 |
| 2008 SLG v. righties | 0.492 | 0.470 |
| Career OBP v. lefties | 0.410 | 0.322 |
| Career SLG v. lefties | 0.540 | 0.411 |
| Career OBP v. righties | 0.352 | 0.355 |
| Career SLG v. righties | 0.467 | 0.494 |
What's clear from this chart is that Burrell and Ibanez are pretty similar hitters with a slight advantage to Burrell. But, there are two big differences between the two. First, Ibanez is 4 years older than Burrell. That's significant, as the age difference matters more for two players in their 30s than in their 20s.
But the second difference is the big one. Look at the platoon splits for the two players. Ibanez actually hit better against lefties this year than against righties (although still much worse than Burrell), but his career numbers show that's an aberration. Over his career, Ibanez has a .733 OPS against lefties, compared to Burrell's .950 OPS. Yes, Ibanez is better against righties than Burrell, but not by much - Ibanez's .849 OPS to Burrell's .819 OPS.
The huge problem is that Ibanez is being inserted into a lineup that already has a big disadvantage against lefties. Chase Utley and Ryan Howard have platoon splits, with Howard's being huge. Pat Burrell's dominance against lefties buffered that problem a bit. Now, with Ibanez in the lineup with Howard and Utley, the Phillies are that much weaker against lefties. They'll hit righties marginally better, but that was never the team's problem.
The bottom line is that Ruben Amaro's first big free agent has these effects:
- it does nothing to solve one big problem (left field defense)
- it marginally improves a non-problem (hitting against righties)
- it significantly worsens the team with respect to a serious problem (hitting against lefties)
- it makes the team older
- it gives up a first-round draft pick (thanks dajafi for reminding me in the comments)
I'd say that adds up to a very troubling start to Amaro's career and a big problem for the Phillies offense.
0 recs |
53 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
truth in advertising
This IS offensive.
http://www.thegoodphight.com
WHY CAN'T US?
by WholeCamels on Dec 12, 2008 5:02 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
I can’t even make a joke about this. I’d love to hear Amaro, or anyone else with the team, mount a defense of the signing that doesn’t include
—RBI totals’
—batting average;
—“athleticism”; or
—“character.”
Can’t imagine they’d be able to do so.
Oh, the one thing missing here is the cost of the team’s first-round pick. Combined with the decision not to offer arbitration to Burrell or Moyer, this means our first selection in next June’s draft will be around #65-70 overall.
Now, I have read (elsewhere) the argument that the first-round pick was so low, as a result of being WFC, that it’s not much to give up anyway. That’s crap. Ed Wade’s free-agent binging put the Phillies system in a hole it took Gillick three years to more or less climb out from, culminating in the big talent infusion that was last summer’s draft. Now it seems like Wadaro Junior has busted out the shovel and pounded a couple Red Bulls.
by dajafi on Dec 12, 2008 5:07 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
So when's the press conference?
And you just don't get it, you keep it copacetic...
by Blicks on Dec 12, 2008 5:24 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Also, say Michael Taylor has a big year in AA/AAA next year and is ready to start on Opening Day 2010. (Not something to bank on, but certainly a plausible scenario.) How do we get him in the lineup? Trade Ibanez? I don’t think so. Even if he plays well again in ’09, the trade value of a 37-year-old leftfielder with an eight-figure salary is not going to be all that great.
No, we’d have to trade Taylor or Werth or Victorino. That sucks.
by taco pal on Dec 12, 2008 5:33 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Isn't Werth a free agent after the 2009 season?
And you just don't get it, you keep it copacetic...
by Blicks on Dec 12, 2008 5:40 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Don’t know. Does it matter? We could try to re-sign him, right? Unless we’re wedded to the last two years of Ibanez’s career and can’t.
by taco pal on Dec 12, 2008 5:55 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Unrelated
Burnett to Yankees.
Lowe to Phillies, please!??!?
by FuquaManuel on Dec 12, 2008 5:36 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Amaro is looking pretty bad right about now.
I hope Ibanez rakes next year, but I doubt it.
The one good thing is he was putting up decent #’s in Seattle, not exactly a hitters park.
by Bilzo on Dec 12, 2008 5:44 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
yea, him coming from Safeco, should mean his numbers should rise a little coming to CBP.
by Ben16 on Dec 12, 2008 6:05 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Safeco actually helps left-handed power hitters' numbers.
Kills righties though.
by Graham on Dec 12, 2008 6:09 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I’ve heard rumors that safeco is HUGE
Are these rumors true?
by jemagee on Dec 12, 2008 6:23 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Safeco is generous to left-handed hitters
In addition to having a shorter power-alley in right center, prevailing winds appear to come in from left field then turn and blow out to right field. The park is deadly for right handed hitters, because they have the combination of longer fences and head wind. Left-handed hitters who put the ball in the air, such as does Ibañez, do very well in Safeco.
by Steve Nelson on Dec 12, 2008 7:02 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
That dumbass Tim Kurkjian doesn’t think Pat Burrell will “get anything close to the 3 years, $30 million that Raul Ibanez got.”
Either Tim is really really wrong or Ruben Amaro is just that much stupider. I don’t see any way in hell that Pat gets LESS than 10 mil a year, but if he does I will be looking for Amaro’s address so I can leave a bag of flaming shit on his doorstep.
by FuquaManuel on Dec 12, 2008 6:15 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
One of those days when I wish the Phillies really were as cheap as people say they are.
by taco pal on Dec 12, 2008 6:19 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I hate to admit it, but Kurkjian has a point.
This is very much a buyer’s market, especially in the OF/DH and RP departments. It’s going to get expensive. And, there aren’t teams with oodles and oodles of cash and few other major needs relative to cash available roaming around searching for OF/DH.
And, as the offseason progresses and more clubs fill their needs through trades/spend their money on other needs/pick up other similar players, Pat’s demand will go down, which naturally brings down his price. Demand dictates market price. When 3-4 teams were going after Raul, it brought his price up.
Hell, had Pat been offered arbitration, it would’ve been smart of him to accept and enter the FA market in 2010 when both the Yankees and Red Sox need OF/DH types, along with maybe the Angels, depending on what happens this offseason and Vlad’s health.
I wouldn’t call it likely, but I could very easily see it happening.
And you just don't get it, you keep it copacetic...
by Blicks on Dec 12, 2008 6:46 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
If Pat accepted arbitration – he would have been here for one year for less money than ibanez will make in two and the odds are pat will have a better overall season than ibanez next year (and ibanez still won’t hit RH)
If he hadn’t accepted arbitration – the phillies probably would have gotten two draft picks.
Now the phillies will get squadoosh – and whether or not pat gets more or less than ibanez i think the point is this
If Ibanez – 4 years older and really not a better option than pat – is worth 3 years 30 million – why isn’t pat?
And if Pat ISNT worth 3 years 30 million dollars WHY THE HELL IS IBANEZ WORTH IT?
SEriously, I see no way, anyone not bat shit crazy can spin this that makes it look like that phillies made many good ideas in this whole situation, let alone one, instead of ALL BAD decisions
by jemagee on Dec 12, 2008 6:52 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Pat might have gotten upwards of 14-15 in arbitration
He made 14MM in 2008. But, as you said, still costs less than 2 years of Ibanez would.
Absolute worth can be argued all day. Pat might get more than Raul Ibanez, or Pat might get less. Some FA “OF” sluggers are going to have to settle for less than they would have gotten in a different market. Which ones is what we’re going to see in the coming weeks.
Not offering arbitration to Burrell would have looked like a good decision if the savings were put towards a frontline starter. Myers is a free agent after the 2009 season, and next year’s starting pitching market looks horrible, as in that’s when teams start overpaying for mediocrity in signings and trades, like Silva, Freddy Garcia trade, Jarrod Washburn, Jeff Suppan, Adam Eaton, etc.
But, Raul Ibanez? No way. Completely idiotic to not offer arbi to pursue Ibanez.
And you just don't get it, you keep it copacetic...
by Blicks on Dec 12, 2008 7:08 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
To many it didn’t look like a good decision at the time (not offering arbitration) and this just demonstrates the inevitability that the phillies would demonstrate it was a mistake not offering said arbitration.
by jemagee on Dec 12, 2008 7:16 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
No, if Pat had accepted arbitration and the market then tanked , Pat would not have gotten upwards of 14-15 in arbitration. There is no rule requiring arbitrators to give raises to players if the market throughout baseball has stagnated or gone down. Why wouldn’t an arbitrator take into account the fact that players equal to Burrell have gotten less than 14-15 on the present market? Arbitration hearings aren’t held until February, long after the market has established itself.
by taco pal on Dec 12, 2008 7:57 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
If I read what what I read correctly – Arbitrators do not usually give a pay cut below last years salary – so i think pat would make a minimum of what he made this year in an arbitration hearing…am i wrong?
by jemagee on Dec 12, 2008 8:24 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
It’s true that arbitrators usually don’t give pay cuts, but I think that has a lot to do with the fact that usually, the market doesn’t give pay cuts either. We’re living in an unusual economy this year. If Burrell has no chance of getting a raise on the open market, then I don’t see how an arbitrator could have given him one either. The arbitrator’s job is to approximate market value.
by taco pal on Dec 12, 2008 8:53 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, you're right on that one.
Players can’t get more than a 25% paycut in arbitration though (I’m pretty sure on that one, but I might be wrong), so he’d be in the 12MM range.
And you just don't get it, you keep it copacetic...
by Blicks on Dec 13, 2008 2:10 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
12-16 million one year for burrell
or 30 million over 3 for ibanez
Well that makes perfect sense now – it all is clear as to not offering arbitration to pat, over weighting the batting order on the left hand side and giving up those draft picks.
by jemagee on Dec 13, 2008 2:11 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Oh yeah it makes sense.
I wasn’t arguing against it.
The arbitration decision and the Ibanez decision were both ridiculous.
And you just don't get it, you keep it copacetic...
by Blicks on Dec 13, 2008 2:16 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Burnett to NY...
Maybe we pursue Lowe more since this should remove the yankees and their ridiculously high offers from the race.
by Ben16 on Dec 12, 2008 6:23 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
The Braves offered Burnett a lot of money – so they could use some of that on Lowe – I’m sure the Phillies ‘top offer’ will be topped by many teams who aren’t run by dumbasses.
by jemagee on Dec 12, 2008 6:53 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
maybe I’m just forcing myself to be positive, but making this move is better than making no move at all, isn’t it? I will agree a thousand times over that getting rivera or delmon would have been a ton better, but I like ibanez so much better than I like a stairs/jenkins/dobbs platoon, or something.
And yes, we overpayed. But overpaying on a 3-year deal isn’t exactly the type of thing that cripples a franchise.
So, no, I’m not happy about this deal either. But I think that if we went into 2009 with SJD in left field, we would be saying, “why didn’t we at least get ibanez?”
as far as losing a draft pick, in principle, I don’t generally worry about that too much. Clearly, our championship window is closer to being closed than it is to being open, so I would rather focus on winning right now than focus on winning in 2013 with a 30th pick.
by char6587 on Dec 12, 2008 7:28 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
We are already though the championship window. Where have you been? ; )
by FuquaManuel on Dec 12, 2008 7:42 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
You’re right that it’s not going to cripple us. In all likelihood, Ibanez will perform ok at the plate next year. He won’t be significantly worse than Burrell in the field. The lefty thing will hurt us, but probably won’t kill us.
But that doesn’t exactly mollify me. The point here is even if the drawbacks are manageable, they were also totally and easily avoidable.
As for “winning right now instead of focusing on winning in 2013 with a 30th pick” — that’s a false choice, because we could have had a LF who’s just as good as, if not better than, Ibanez, for less money, and still kept the pick. Wouldn’t you rather have both than only one?
And in general, I’m totally opposed to talk about focusing on our present window. Why can’t we keep the window open? How do you know we won’t be able to do it if we don’t maintain at least a certain amount of emphasis on the farm system? Being fatalistic and saying that we have to sacrifice the future since our window is going to close anyway sounds like a plan that’s designed to be a self-fulfilling prophecy.
by taco pal on Dec 12, 2008 7:55 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Sorry, that second-to-last sentence was horrendously written. What I meant was: How do you know the window is doomed to close? Our farm system isn’t the greatest, but people didn’t think we had all that great a farm system in 2000, 2001 either.
If there’s one thing about sports fans, particularly Philly sports fans, it’s that they always would rather focus on winning right now than winning in a few years. Then, five years later, they complain about all the good players we used to have but traded away for nothing.
Around 1982-84, the Phillies were aging and thought their window was closing, so they cleaned our their farm system to make a bunch of shortsighted deals. As it turned out, if they had just stood pat and kept their young talent around (Ryne Sandberg, Mark Davis, Julio Franco, George Bell, Keith Moreland, etc.), they would have remained a good team for a long time – their window wasn’t closing at all. Instead, it closed for real and we got about fifteen years worth of crap.
by taco pal on Dec 12, 2008 8:07 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
also
from a beerleaguer commnent:
2008 2nd half:
Ibanez .321ba 12hr 55rbi .380obp .921ops
Burrell .215ba 10hr 29rbi .313obp .725ops
by char6587 on Dec 12, 2008 7:32 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
yesbut
2008 1st half:
Ibanez .273 AVG 11 HR 55 RBI .338 OBP .776 OPS
Burrell .275 AVG 23 HR 57 RBI .404 OBP .979 OPS
I mean, the first half counts just as much as the second. (actually, more, since B-R splits the season at the ASB, which is 90+ games in.) if Burrell had a history of fading down the stretch, maybe you’d have something, but his career 1st/2nd half splits are virtually identical (.851 vs .853 OPS).
by perfectdepth on Dec 12, 2008 8:55 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I guess the idea is that Burrell’s second half slump might be proof he’s declining, since that’s the most recent thing we’ve got on him. Seems unlikely to me though. He’s only 32 and streaky by nature.
by taco pal on Dec 12, 2008 9:04 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Looking at one half of one season as opposed to the entirety of a career (and ignoring age) reeks to me of someone DESPERATE to give the phillies management a way out of not looking like utter and total schmucks here.
Ibanez is 36, Burrell is 32 – Ibanez isn’t exactly a spring chicken – he probably will decline sooner (and faster) than Mr Burrell
by jemagee on Dec 12, 2008 9:15 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
this hurts
[S]igning a very similar player to a three-year contract without getting the picks for Burrell is plain ol’ mismanagement. And to make matters worse, the move cost the Phillies their own first-round draft pick. We’re talking about the scouting staff that drafted top prospects Michael Taylor, Dominic Brown, Jason Donald and Lou Marson in the past few years, as well as Adrian Cardenas and Josh Outman, both of whom were used to land Joe Blanton in a midseason trade. The goal should be to give the scouting department more picks, not fewer, unless the move makes the big league club better, which the Burrell-for-Ibanez tradeoff does not.
by dajafi on Dec 13, 2008 3:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Well, it’s not REALLY the scouting staff that did that any more now is it since they gave arbuckle the finger and he left for KC – i mean maybe the new scouting staff sucks?:)
by jemagee on Dec 13, 2008 3:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
AH, so that’s the ‘fan on the street’ view that someone mentioned earlier…it’s early on a Saturday morning, but still gave me a laugh.
by jemagee on Dec 13, 2008 11:06 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
This is what happens when baseball musings talks about a post on your blog
So the sixers did something right today
What are the chances the phillies fail Ibanez in the physical and rescind the contract?
by jemagee on Dec 13, 2008 1:48 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
burrell
tis is a joke burrell needs to be with the phillies they need to just give him three years not ibanez who is on a downward trend and burrell is pat the bat and miste clutc
by bobobo on Dec 13, 2008 4:58 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
I must ask again: when's the Raul Ibanez press conference
when Amaro and crew introduce Ibanez to the media, the jersey, etc.
And you just don't get it, you keep it copacetic...
by Blicks on Dec 13, 2008 10:10 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
And where can I watch it?
And you just don't get it, you keep it copacetic...
by Blicks on Dec 13, 2008 10:10 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
next week
They haven’t “officially” announced it yet. After he passes the physical, which I assume is a formality, they’ll have the presser and do all that.
by dajafi on Dec 14, 2008 3:27 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks. :-)
There are probably going to be references to grit/character/heart…
Although, if he fails his “physical” and signs with the Angels later on in the offseason, that would be awesome. Hold out hope plz?
"And you just don't get it, you keep it copacetic..."
by Blicks on Dec 14, 2008 3:11 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
burrell
its like charlie said it is hard to imagine a line up that includes the cannon they had in pat burrell i guess more people will left field now that they wont get thrown out at the plate burrell did lead the league in outfield assist did he or did he not ruben what the hell are you thinking a guy that is four years olde are you crazy aother year to burrell offer and a couple million would not get somebodys grandfather t play lef feild this is a joke so no more pat the bat to clean up howads strike outs i guess you wont be in charge long as gm you wil be fired be too long bad first free agent signing leads to more bad moves way to go ruben pat was the face of our franchise for nine years how could you notgive him a serious offer
by bobobo on Dec 14, 2008 10:55 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Penelope
Is that an excerpt from the last chapter of Ulysses?
http://www.thegoodphight.com
WHY CAN'T US?
by WholeCamels on Dec 14, 2008 11:08 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 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.
