as an a's fan, i'm just happy bobby crosby still has the potential to be league average.

I can't believe Chris Shelton and Mark Buehrle didn't make it!

When did Miguel Cabrera become a good defensive third baseman?

Also, Reyes and Hanley may have similar offensive numbers, but defense should put Reyes firmly ahead.

They left out Manny. Wow.

Did you read the intro, Kev?

• All present contracts are wiped out. In other words, price does not matter.
• Major league service time is also wiped out -- all players are treated as rookies. However, the structure of MLB's free agency rules is left intact. What this means is that you have six years of major league service time at your disposal before your player becomes a free agent. In most cases, this simply means that you'll get the player's 2007 through 2012 seasons -- A-Rod's performance from age 31 through age 37, for example, or Jose Reyes from age 24 through age 29. But if the player is still developing, you're also allowed to stash him in the minor leagues and then start his service time clock at some point in the future.

So, uh, I suppose the NL East is a pretty good division for third basemen. List seemed a little light on pitchers, but 6 years IS a pretty long time for a pitcher.

And no Chipper Jones either..hmm

I thought it seemed too heavy on pitchers (17 of 'em by count), especially young pitchers: Hughes, Lincecum, Weaver, Verlander, Liriano, Hamels, and Kazmir. If I was going to list that many pitchers, I think I'd prefer the Lackey/Zito/Haren settled group than some of those guys. They do say they're going for upside, though...

I'd put Zimmerman ahead of Wright. Zimm's glove is marvelous and Wright's future is at first base.

Hanley deserves to be in the Top 10, but not ahead of Jose.

Since 1950 there are just eight catchers who have had more than one season in which they posted a .300-plus batting average and 25-plus home runs. Seven of those guys -- Johnny Bench, Yogi Berra, Roy Campanella, Gary Carter, Carlton Fisk, Ivan Rodriguez and Mike Piazza -- are inner-circle Hall of Famers. The other is Joe Torre, who should get his plaque in Cooperstown soon enough.

Everybody always forgets Rick Wilkins' 1993.

And no Chipper Jones either..hmm

Chipper is simply too brittle to make a list of this nature.

So, uh, I suppose the NL East is a pretty good division for third basemen.

Wes Helms brings the overall mean down to below average.

I have not done the math but off the top of my head I don't think that you can EVER include pitchers in a 6-year (any long-term) list. Most people do NOT realize the attrition rate of the average pitcher, regardless of how good they are. I am guessing now - I would have to look it up - but after around 5 years I think that the chance that a well-above average pitcher is even still pitching at all is around 50%. Not to mention the unpredictability of pitcher performance, which basically means that a pitcher is who, for example, has had a sustained ERA+ of 120 is projected at maybe 110 a couple of years down the road. We THINK that good pitchers stay good because we really only remember the Maddux', Clemens', Holliday's, Pedro's, etc. For every one of them, there are at least one (maybe two or more - I don't know) who pitch wonderfully for a while and then are never the same due to injury or otherwise. Not so generally for position players.

By position:

17 SP
6 1B
5 CF
5 SS
5 3B
4 2B
3 C
2 DH
2 RF
1 LF
0 RP

Teams with no players listed: White Sox, A's, Reds, Rockies, and Dodgers. That's it.

Teams tied for the most with four players listed: Yanks, Twins, Indians, D-Rays, Phillies.

Teams with three: Mets, Angels.

Teams with two: Red Sox, Tigers, Braves, Marlins, D-backs.

Since 1950 there are just eight catchers who have had more than one season in which they posted a .300-plus batting average and 25-plus home runs. Seven of those guys -- Johnny Bench, Yogi Berra, Roy Campanella, Gary Carter, Carlton Fisk, Ivan Rodriguez and Mike Piazza -- are inner-circle Hall of Famers. The other is Joe Torre, who should get his plaque in Cooperstown soon enough.

Everybody always forgets Rick Wilkins' 1993.

And you forgot Mike Lieberthal's 1999. But the list is of catchers who did it twice.

Sizemore ahead of Reyes?

Sizemore "supernaturally great" at everything. What, making contact isn't a skill? Call me old fashioned, but I'm not calling a a guy with a slugging percentage in the .400s great when he's striking out 150-to-180 times per year.

I think there's a tendency to overrate the small market guys just like there's a tendency to overrate pitching and the majesty of the 1-0 game. It helps people justify that they're smarter than the average fan. But it's bunk.

I think there's a tendency to overrate the small market guys just like there's a tendency to overrate pitching and the majesty of the 1-0 game. It helps people justify that they're smarter than the average fan. But it's bunk.

I think it's more of a tendency to rate guys who were good with the glove and the bat before 2006 over guys who weren't.

"Sizemore "supernaturally great" at everything. What, making contact isn't a skill? Call me old fashioned, but I'm not calling a a guy with a slugging percentage in the .400s great when he's striking out 150-to-180 times per year."

He's got a .320 EQA right now (and he's only hitting .255 right now, and he's a .283 career hitter). He plays a plus centerfield, he's 24, he's already been the best player in his league once in his career and you're not willing to call him great?

"I think there's a tendency to overrate the small market guys just like there's a tendency to overrate pitching and the majesty of the 1-0 game. It helps people justify that they're smarter than the average fan. But it's bunk."

Yeah, 30-30 threats who are play good defense up the middle and have good plate discipline and bat for a high average are way overrated.

I was surprised by Jeter and Berkman at 31 and 32 considering their ages. Both are great players, but neither had the amazing peak that would seem to carry them through their mid-30's as franchise players.

Also, the list had a great deal of (NR)'s. That huge variability hurts the credibility of last year's list.

I don't have a link to last year's list. Did Silver include a great deal of prospects last year? He seemed to have stuck with MLB players this year. (Also, why not include top college players?)

To back up Danny's point in post #17, this claim strikes me as a bit much: "if Ramirez were in New York and Reyes in Florida, the presumption would be that Hanley is the better player." The presumption? Really?

They had very similar seasons last year offensively: .292/.353/.480 for Hanley, .300/.354/.487 for Reyes. Reyes was a little better on the basepaths, 64 SB/17 CS to Hanley's 51 SB/15 CS. And the word is Reyes is the better fielder, too.

Most importantly, though, Reyes put up good numbers the year before, while Hanley put up so-so numbers in double A. Maybe Hanley's more projectable on account of his height, as the article states, but I think the "presumption" has to go to the guy who's done it more than once, doesn't it? Reyes is only six months older than Hanley (Silver cites this, weirdly, as a point in Hanley's favor-- which it would be, if Reyes hadn't made it to the majors so much more quickly).

(Obviously they're both terrific players and I wish Hanley was still with Boston.)

Yeah, 30-30 threats who are play good defense up the middle and have good plate discipline and bat for a high average are way overrated.

Your second 30 there is what's way overrated. And he's on pace to K 180 times, so he should be hitting .255. I've seen his splits versus breaking balls and they are UGLY. But, hey, maybe hitting a curve is underrated, right? And you better hit more than 30 homers in the AL if you're investing 150-plus whiffs into your power.

and have good plate discipline

Have you noticed that that Sizemore has struck out twice as often as he's walked in his career? That's not good plate discipline. If you want to be accurate, just say he walks a lot. I'll grant you that, at least this year.

Sizemore is a very good player who has the potential for greatness, but he currently has gaping holes in his swing and, thus, his game.

"They had very similar seasons last year offensively: .292/.353/.480 for Hanley, .300/.354/.487 for Reyes. Reyes was a little better on the basepaths, 64 SB/17 CS to Hanley's 51 SB/15 CS. And the word is Reyes is the better fielder, too."

Yeah, his reasoning that Hanley is three inches taller and thus has more power potential was curious. I'll take Reyes and not think twice right now, despite how close they are offensively and on the basepaths.

I'll take Grady over anyone.

"Your second 30 there is what's way overrated. And he's on pace to K 180 times, so he should be hitting .255. I've seen his splits versus breaking balls and they are UGLY."

He's also on pace for 56 SBs and 140 walks. Are you sure you want to use pace here to make your point?

"Have you noticed that that Sizemore has struck out twice as often as he's walked in his career? That's not good plate discipline."

Have you noticed how little striking out 153 times hurt his production last year? He walked 80 times last year, so K's. So did a whole bunch of hitters who are awesome, and alot of those guys weren't the all around player that Sizemore is.

"Sizemore is a very good player who has the potential for greatness, but he currently has gaping holes in his swing and, thus, his game."

He actually doesn't have a single hole in his game. He's already been great, and right now, he's being great again. Your strikeout arguement would matter if he wasn't owning the league right now, while striking out this much. The K thing doesn't really mean much, although it seems to be enough for you to call a franchise player merely "good".

Your strikeout argument would matter if he wasn't owning the league right now, while striking out this much.

He's hitting .250 with an .850 OPS. That's owning the league? It's 2007, not 1977. Please, use the word "great" conservatively because there's nowhere left to go from there unless you want to start talking like a Valley Girl. What will you say about Grady if he ever learns to hit a curve?

Jose Reyes, for his career, is hitting .245/.262/.343 in inter-league games.

The past two seasons, after his blossoming, he is hitting .279/.301/.411 against American League teams. Wake me when he plays in a real league.

Grady Sizemore should be president.

Most importantly, though, Reyes put up good numbers the year before, while Hanley put up so-so numbers in double A.

I wouldn't call an 80 OPS+ a good year, although it was more impressive than what Hanley did in AA.

Go back two years and you have to give Hanley a pretty big edge with strong minor league numbers vs. Reyes' 65 OPS+. I'm not going to give Reyes bonus points for being rushed and overmatched.

Add it all up and these two are essentially the same player.

Neither are in Sizemore's league, though, there's a pretty big gap between #5 and #6 on this list.

Sizemore was at worst the 5th best player in the league last year, so far this year he's been even better. If that's not great I don't know what is.

"He's hitting .250 with an .850 OPS. That's owning the league? It's 2007, not 1977."

Why are you using OPS? He's got a 137 OPS+ right now. A .320 EQA. Offense has been way, way down this year. And you know that.

"Please, use the word "great" conservatively because there's nowhere left to go from there unless you want to start talking like a Valley Girl."

Man, you are so off here, it's kind of silly. Neyer compared him Duke Snider. Nate Silver ranked him as the 5th most valuable player in the league. PMSWLTS and VORP+ZR had him as the best player in the AL last year. What does he have to do to be great?

"What will you say about Grady if he ever learns to hit a curve?"

What does being able to hit a curve have to do with being one of the most valuable players in the league? He's been great without hitting the curve supposedely. If he learns it, well, they better have a league up on Mount Olympus.

He's hitting .250 with an .850 OPS. That's owning the league?

In a league with a collective 734 OPS (and that's with the DH!), and for a player who has been B-A-N-A-N-A-S great in centerfield, yes that is great, awesome, great.

It's 2007, not 1977.

2007 AL: .258/.329/.405
1977 AL: .266/.327/.405

Also, why do you keep talking about strikeouts and breaking balls instead of overall performance? And why are you ignoring everything that happened before 2006?

They had very similar seasons last year offensively: .292/.353/.480 for Hanley, .300/.354/.487 for Reyes. Reyes was a little better on the basepaths, 64 SB/17 CS to Hanley's 51 SB/15 CS. And the word is Reyes is the better fielder, too.

1) BP'S FRAA has Reyes as awful defensively--contrary to ZR.
2) Hanley's PECOTA comparables blow Reyes's out of the water, maybe b/c of the height.

I take both Hanley and Reyes over Sizemore. The reason is simple - an offensive SS is much, much rarer than an offensive CFer, even if the latter is a better hitter. If a team loses a Sizemore, they can always pluck a decent hitting OFer to sub in. If a team loses a Hanley, they end up sticking Cristian Guzman in that position.

I take both Hanley and Reyes over Sizemore. The reason is simple - an offensive SS is much, much rarer than an offensive CFer, even if the latter is a better hitter. If a team loses a Sizemore, they can always pluck a decent hitting OFer to sub in. If a team loses a Hanley, they end up sticking Cristian Guzman in that position.

This would be a good point (positional adjustments good!) if they were equal hitters, but they're not. Sizemore's been a better hitter than them every year except the 100 AB of 2007. And he's done that in a better league. And he's been a very good defender for more than a single season.

1) BP'S FRAA has Reyes as awful defensively--contrary to ZR.
2) Hanley's PECOTA comparables blow Reyes's out of the water, maybe b/c of the height.

1) It's the only defensive metric that has Reyes as poor. That metric doesn't have as much support as many of the other metrics out there. The general consensus among observers is that Reyes is excellent defensively.

2) Don't have access to the Pecota comparables. Could you list them?

1) It's the only defensive metric that has Reyes as poor. That metric doesn't have as much support as many of the other metrics out there. The general consensus among observers is that Reyes is excellent defensively.

I'm with you, just explaining why Silver would have Hanley ahead.

2) Don't have access to the Pecota comparables. Could you list them?

Reyes: Rollins, Campaneris, C. Guzman, Aparicio, Templeton
Hanley: M. Duncan, Sandberg, Molitor, Larkin, Dunston

Reyes also has guys like Larkin, Durham, Molitor and Yount further down the list, IIRC.

This would be a good point (positional adjustments good!) if they were equal hitters, but they're not. Sizemore's been a better hitter than them every year except the 100 AB of 2007. And he's done that in a better league. And he's been a very good defender for more than a single season.

It's not just the issue of positional adjustment, it's an issue of the rarity of a good hitting SS who can stay at that position. For example, just browsing the Bill James Historical Abstract, here's the #10 player in his rankings at each position.

#10 CF: Jimmy Wynn
#10 SS: Pee Wee Reese

#25 CF: Brett Butler
#25 SS: Bert Campaneris

#50 CF: Lloyd Waner
#50 SS: Leo Cardenas

Note the disparity in offensive potential.

Those are good points about depressed hitting in the AL. And there's my column for tomorrow, so thanks.

As for the defensive metrics, they're all ####, in my opinion, except for Baseball Info Solutions. BIS knows that all the current metrics are #### and is going for a hybrid approach on Bill James's advice, where they actually scout all the players making all the plays and subjectively assess whether or not balls are playable. I'm probably not giving what BIS does justice in my description. Alas, the Fielding Bible is only going to be published every two years at best.

And that brings us back to Grady, who many hear say is playing the best centerfield in baseball. But Bill James says that Coco Crisp has played the best CF he's seen of late. So, who knows about defense.

I don't know what it is, but I'll take the under on Grady's average this year. And I'll take Reyes over Grady right now. And you have to be joking with those interleague splits, whoever you are.

Oops. "Here." Where's my copy editor when I need him?

Most importantly, though, Reyes put up good numbers the year before, while Hanley put up so-so numbers in double A.

Reyes put up .273/.300/.386 the year before, as compared to Hanley's MLE line of .250/.308/.356 - pretty even really the year before.

Offensively, I'll take Hanley going forward over Reyes. It's razor thin, but Hanley has been Reyes' offensive equal so far, and I'll take the three inches in terms of future projectability. Silver's analysis is flawed for the same reason that people have been criticizing BP for years now - reliance on their own defensive metric when it is simply not on par with others', and not in agreement with others on this issue either.

Of course, Reyes wasn't that good defensively when he first came up either. Hanley should improve, and could match Reyes, but until he does, I'll take the defense over the three inches.

What does being able to hit a curve have to do with being one of the most valuable players in the league?

I have no opinion as to whether or not Sizemore can hit the curve (and I love Sizemore, probably my favorite AL position player), but having a particular weakness would be relevant in that the player's late-and-close production should be reduced, on account of the possibility of bringing in a reliever who can exploit that weakness. Most obviously, this is due to a platoon advantage, but being vulnerable to a particular type of pitch, or a particular type of delivery, would also fall into that category.

Of course, this would show up in a player's late and close production, so it would be discernible from the stat sheet, but it might provide a reason to not dismiss that split as random noise.

And you have to be joking with those interleague splits, whoever you are.

I don't joke when it comes to discussing Grady Sizemore.

What is your objection? Sample size? Reyes has 129 interleague at-bats over the previous two seasons, while Grady Sizemore has 139 plate appearances this season, yet you still refer to Sizemore's numbers this year as if they are meaningful.

Do you deny that Reyes has spent the previous two seasons playing in an inferior league.

And there should be a question mark at the end of that sentence, obviously. 'Tis late. Grady Sizemore would have gotten it right.

Why are you using OPS? He's got a 137 OPS+ right now.

Is OPS+ a reasonable stat to use after 30 games? I really don't know, but it seems that one's performance relative to league is more heavily skewed based on particular competition in a smaller, incomplete sample.

It's razor thin, but Hanley has been Reyes' offensive equal so far, and I'll take the three inches in terms of future projectability. Silver's analysis is flawed for the same reason that people have been criticizing BP for years now - reliance on their own defensive metric when it is simply not on par with others', and not in agreement with others on this issue either.

In particular, BP's defensive numbers have been killing some recent Jay Jaffe's HOF analyses. I think specifically with regard to Chipper Jones and Jeff Kent, Jaffe recently concluded that they weren't HOF caliber, in large part because BP's defensive numbers rated them as extremely poor defenders.

"And there's my column for tomorrow, so thanks."

No problem.

"And that brings us back to Grady, who many hear say is playing the best centerfield in baseball. But Bill James says that Coco Crisp has played the best CF he's seen of late. So, who knows about defense."

For two weeks, James said Crisp was playing the best CF he had seen. So tons of statistical and observational evidence that Sizemore isn't a good fielder isn't enough to convince you that he's good? What stops me from saying the same thing about Jose Reyes? Look Sizemore has been the better then Reyes constantly, except for 100 ABs this year, and it's still pretty close right now. The both play up the middle positions very well (whether you want to acknowledge it or not) and they are both very good baserunners. Grady's offense up to this point has more then made up for the positional difference and Reyes superior speed. I don't see any reason why this won't continue.

"Of course, this would show up in a player's late and close production, so it would be discernible from the stat sheet, but it might provide a reason to not dismiss that split as random noise."

Good point. Sizemore's numbers do go down a bit in close and late situations. But they also stay the same with 2 out and RISP, and in tie games he's performed better. I don't see much evidence that his vulnerability to the curve has been leveraged much, and has not taken away from his productivity as far as I can tell.

"Is OPS+ a reasonable stat to use after 30 games? I really don't know, but it seems that one's performance relative to league is more heavily skewed based on particular competition in a smaller, incomplete sample."

Maybe. But just going off of OPS when offense is down around the league is much, much worse IMO. An OBO .865 OPS is way more valuable so far this year then it was last year. EQA agrees. Unless you want to say everyone in the league except A-rod is worse this year, I don't know how else you're going to get a good sense of how a guy is performing so far this year without something like OPS+ or EQA, that is adjusted for the level of offense so far this season.

Did Cleveland get Sizemore along with Lee and Philips in the Colon deal? Was that the worst trade of the past 25 years?

"Did Cleveland get Sizemore along with Lee and Philips in the Colon deal?"

Yes.

"Was that the worst trade of the past 25 years?"

Possibly.

I guess 20 years would be a safer cutoff, since 25 includes Bagwell for Larry Andersen. But at least the Sox made the playoffs that year.

And that brings us back to Grady, who many hear say is playing the best centerfield in baseball. But Bill James says that Coco Crisp has played the best CF he's seen of late. So, who knows about defense.

It's probably worth noting that when they were teammates, Sizemore played center field each and every time they were in the lineup together.

It's really stunning to me that we're even having this discussion. Last year the kid led the league in runs, doubles, extra-base hits, finished second in total bases, hit 28 home runs, hit 11 triples, stole 22 bases at nearly an 80% success rate, on-based .375, slugged .533, and played a crazy-good center field. At age 23.

If that ain't one of the five or six most valuable commodities in baseball, I don't know what is.

Wait, Sizemore is being ragged on cos he strikes out a lot?

Must suck, look at 2005 and 2006

99 and 01. can never keep up those numbers

75 and 76. Good thing he got boo-ed

82 and 84. just a lucky hitter huh

And these were off the top off my head...

Call me old fashioned, but I'm not calling a a guy with a slugging percentage in the .400s great when he's striking out 150-to-180 times per year.

Grady has never done this.

In 2005, he slugged .484 and struck out 132 times.

In 2006, he slugged .533 and struck out 153 times.

I'll take those numbers in a good fielding CF who also has a solid-to-strong OBP.

I also like the 150-to-180 range you give for his Ks when he struck out 153 times. You might also want to note that each of the past two years he has had 3-to-50 errors in CF, so he must be a bad fielder.

And you forgot Mike Lieberthal's 1999.

And both of you forgot Mike Stanley's 1993.

Last year the kid led the league in runs, doubles, extra-base hits, finished second in total bases, hit 28 home runs, hit 11 triples, stole 22 bases at nearly an 80% success rate, on-based .375, slugged .533, and played a crazy-good center field. At age 23.

If that ain't one of the five or six most valuable commodities in baseball, I don't know what is.

He is, only one person is disputing that.
I assume that Salfino hadn't realized how good Grady has been the last 2 years*, but when it was pointed out to him, instead of backing off on his initial asessement he's been scrambling to justify it.

*Personally I didn't realize that he'd scored 134 runs and had 92 extra basehits and was only 23 until 5 minutes ago- my mental image of Grady was that he was 25 and had hit .280/.350/.475- which he handily beat last year ate AGE 23

I didn't say that Sizemore isn't a very valuable commodity. I'm disputing that he's more valuable than Reyes. And, according to some here, much more valuable as someone noted the huge dropoff between Sizemore and Reyes and that hasn't been disputed as best as I can tell after a quick scan of the board.

The BIS video scouts had Sizemore as the second best defensive CF last year. Those guys get the final word, as far as I'm concerned. Carlos Beltran, by the way, was No. 1. Reyes wasn't given a high ranking by them, though he did score higher than Ramirez. I concur with the other poster on the relative value of offensive shortstops versus CFs.

Sizemore turns 25 in August, so I don't know what JPW is talking about.

The 180 Ks is his 2007 pace. I don't think he'll hit it, but it's reasonable evidence he hasn't tightened up his swing. I can't seriously consider that a hitter without top-shelf power can be projected to continue to ascend offensively while striking out once per game. If I didn't know about his .400-something average plus slugging percentage versus curves, I'd have a high level of confidence that he'd learn to make better contact. I wish I had a broader context for the curve stat, but I do know that most top hitters handle that pitch far better than Grady.

I concur with the other poster on the relative value of offensive shortstops versus CFs.

We're kind of in a golden age for hitting shortstops though, aren't we? I think there's good reason to believe that James's New Historical Baseball Abstract's rankings based on 120 (or so) years at the position aren't predictive of the dispersal of talent in the modern era.

It's also worth noting that this list includes 5 shorstops (Rollins ,Jeter, Tejada, Reyes, Ramirez, and this doesn't include ARod) and 4 centerfielders (Sizemore, Beltran, Andruw, Wells).

Not that this matters but I was surprised to find 4 second sackers on the list (Upton, Cano, Kendrick, Utley) which is a typically weak position.

The 180 Ks is his 2007 pace.

And he'll also score 140 runs and steal 59 bases without being caught stealing. I'll accept the Ks, particularly in the leadoff spot.

I'm disputing that he's more valuable than Reyes.

He out-VORPed him by 10 runs last year, while providing what seems to be better defense. He was also much better an a per-PA basis, while playing in a more difficult league.

I haven't seen you provide ANY evidence that Reyes is more valuable than Sizemore. All I've seen is criticisms of Ks and curveballs.

Go back two years and you have to give Hanley a pretty big edge with strong minor league numbers vs. Reyes' 65 OPS+. I'm not going to give Reyes bonus points for being rushed and overmatched.

uh. dude was hurt all season. jackass.

I was surprised to find 4 second sackers on the list (Upton

Just to prove I'm not merely picking on Grady, I'll emphatically state that I don't believe in Upton, either. Of course, he has no defensive value. But those strikeouts are a joke.

And why accept the Ks in the leadoff spot? He's only leading off once per game. Batting leadoff has little to do with this calculation.

Reyes was +9 via Dials numbers at SS. that's hard to top for a CF. i'll take reyes, thanks.

"Reyes was +9 via Dials numbers at SS. that's hard to top for a CF."

Yup, unless you happen to be much better with the bat, like Sizemore is. Most metrics give Sizemore the edge in the field apparently.

Yup, unless you happen to be much better with the bat, like Sizemore is. Most metrics give Sizemore the edge in the field apparently.

Reyes is a year younger. If you take that into account, they're basically the same player. Reyes merely has to do this year what Sizemore did last year. He's well on his way.

Also, as for the tougher league argument, why not adjust Reyes's stats upward relative to the NL, which is a tougher hitting enviornment.

The idea that there is a huge difference between leagues isn't something I'd expect from this group. Yes, I'm aware of the intereleague numbers in '06. But it's a real stretch to think the players as a whole in the AL are significantly better than those in the NL. The odds of that actually being true are decidely against. What happened in 10 percent or less of total games played isn't strong enough evidence for me to make that big leap.

And why accept the Ks in the leadoff spot? He's only leading off once per game. Batting leadoff has little to do with this calculation.

I would imagine a leadoff hitter hits with runners on base much less frequently than the 3rd or 4th slot, even after you remove their first inning at bats.

Yup, unless you happen to be much better with the bat, like Sizemore is. Most metrics give Sizemore the edge in the field apparently.

Reyes is a year younger. If you take that into account, they're basically the same player. Reyes merely has to do this year what Sizemore did last year. He's well on his way.

Also, as for the tougher league argument, why not adjust Reyes's stats upward relative to the NL, which is a tougher hitting enviornment.

The idea that there is a huge difference between leagues isn't something I'd expect from this group. Yes, I'm aware of the intereleague numbers in '06. But it's a real stretch to think the players as a whole in the AL are significantly better than those in the NL. The odds of that actually being true are decidely against. What happened in 10 percent or less of total games played isn't strong enough evidence for me to make that big leap.

Since 1950 there are just eight catchers who have had more than one season in which they posted a .300-plus batting average and 25-plus home runs. Seven of those guys -- Johnny Bench, Yogi Berra, Roy Campanella, Gary Carter, Carlton Fisk, Ivan Rodriguez and Mike Piazza -- are inner-circle Hall of Famers. The other is Joe Torre, who should get his plaque in Cooperstown soon enough.

I don't know what Silver's talking about--since 1950, only three catchers have had more than one season like this. Mike Piazza did it eight times; Roy Campanella and Ivan Rodriguez each did it three times. Neither Carter nor Bench ever had a full season where they hit .300.

In fact, if he wanted to make McCann sound impressive, he wouldn't have even needed to use the "since 1950" qualifier--besides the three already mentioned, the only other guy to do this more than once was Bill Dickey.

I would imagine a leadoff hitter hits with runners on base much less frequently than the 3rd or 4th slot, even after you remove their first inning at bats.

I don't know how you define much less. So, Sizemore is a 30-homer, .300-hitting player who can't bat third because he strikes out too much? Or is that he bats leadoff so as to minimize the negative impact of the strikeouts? Or does he strikeout a lot because he says, "Screw it, no one is on base anyway so I'm going for the Downs."

I think salfino's main point is that it's going to be hard for Sizemore to maintain or improve his production without cutting down on his K rate or learning to hit a curve, especially as he is not (yet) a big time power threat. Accepting that Sizemore is already a great player, in large part because of his position, defense, durability and speed, I don't think it's unreasonable to believe that he is not a fully formed player at the plate just yet.

And as of this moment, I'm not sure that Sizemore is a better hitter than Reyes. History says that he is, but Reyes appears to be improving at a rapid pace.

So, Sizemore is a 30-homer, .300-hitting player who can't bat third because he strikes out too much? Or is that he bats leadoff so as to minimize the negative impact of the strikeouts? Or does he strikeout a lot because he says, "Screw it, no one is on base anyway so I'm going for the Downs."

He bats leadoff cuz he bats leadoff. I just think the negative value of his strikeouts is less than it would be if he were batting 3rd.

Is durability really a skill? Maybe Reyes is still being knocked for that in some circles.

The idea that there is a huge difference between leagues isn't something I'd expect from this group. Yes, I'm aware of the intereleague numbers in '06. But it's a real stretch to think the players as a whole in the AL are significantly better than those in the NL. The odds of that actually being true are decidely against. What happened in 10 percent or less of total games played isn't strong enough evidence for me to make that big leap.

Over the last three years the AL has gone 417-339 (a .552 winning pct) against the NL - that's 756 games- that's a lot of games, the odds of that happening if the leagues were even are decidedly against.

Ovwer the last 2 years the AL has gone 290-214- a .575 winning pct.
A .575 winning percentage over 504 games? That's not significant?
How about the performance over the last 2 years of players switching leagues? There was a study done on the Hardball Times (halfway through 2006) that showed that players switching from the NL to the AL lost about 2.5 runs and players switiching from the Al to the NL gained about 2.5 runs (using linear weights)

I'm a life long Met fan, I've been in an NL only roto league for 15- I don't like this conclusion any more than you do, but it's not a question of whether the AL is stronger (right now), but merely by how much. There was a study done on the Hardball Times (halfway through 2006) that showed that players switching from the NL to the AL lost about 2.5 runs and players switiching from the Al to the NL gained about 2.5 runs (using linear weights)

Wow.

One cardinal.

And even he sucks right now.

The idea that there is a huge difference between leagues isn't something I'd expect from this group. Yes, I'm aware of the intereleague numbers in '06. But it's a real stretch to think the players as a whole in the AL are significantly better than those in the NL. The odds of that actually being true are decidely against. What happened in 10 percent or less of total games played isn't strong enough evidence for me to make that big leap.

Salfino - the idea that there is a significant difference between leagues isn't based on the interleague numbers for '06, but on the research of MGL, Nate Silver, and the Red Sox, who have all concluded that that the AL is about 10 games stronger than the NL (for 2005-2006). Right or wrong - it's based on much more than simply AL dominance in interleague play. MGL's work was based largely on the performance on players who moved from the AL to the NL, and vice verca, in much the same way that MLEs are constructed.

I thought Reyes was being knocked mostly because he only has one decent major league season. (118 ops+ best season vs gradys worse season at 125)

Grady has 1760 plate appearances at an ops+ of 125, Reyes has 2115 plate appearances with an ops+ of 100, the difference is pretty huge. Outside of the weak strikeout argument, which nobody has an idea why you are fascinated with a particular type of out. (an out is an out, it's already showing up in other numbers---re mentioning it, doesn't mean you count it negatively twice)

I'm one of the people that oppose the AL superiority argument, but it's a tough argument to oppose to be honest, there is a reason why it has traction on this board. It's pretty much accepted fact that the AL is superior to the Nl the last two seasons, the argument is how much better (the red sox organization believes it's a ten game difference)

Or does he strikeout a lot because he says, "Screw it, no one is on base anyway so I'm going for the Downs."

I think this qualifies as a radical interpretation of the stats. The more obvious answer is that he strikes out a lot because he is taking a lot of pitches. He is 4th in the AL in pitches per plate appearance and 3rd in walks per plate appearance. Since he bats leadoff and thereby is more frequently in the position of having no one on base, a walk is literally as good as a hit and a strikeout is no worse than any other kind of out in a larger percentage of his plate appearances. Exactly 2/3 of his PAs have been with None On so far this year. In contrast, Travis Hafner (hitting third) has batted with None On just 46.4% of the time. By seeing a lot of pitches, Sizemore is making the most of his situation.

Ovwer the last 2 years the AL has gone 290-214- a .575 winning pct.
A .575 winning percentage over 504 games?

I'm not a statistician. But it seems like there's a lot of regression to the mean to expect from these recent AL stats. Sample sizes with groups of players or teams or, in this case, all of major league baseball, are far less impressive than they seem.

I wrote about this last year and I fear I got it wrong because I fear I was using standard deviation in an individual and not a group context.

In other words, no matter how big the sample seems, this is still a very small percentage of total games played. So is it like calculating the odds of a coin being flipped heads or tails 575 times out of a thousand? I honestly don't know.

While I'll grant that it's likely that the AL is a stronger league (leagues are never going to be totally equal, obviously), I suspect the interleague argument and the argument about how players perform when they change leagues siginficantly overstates the actual differences in the talent levels of these two very large groups of players. The trouble is, we don't have any other way to do it. Of course, that doesn't mean that either of these ways actually answers the question.

Grady has 1760 plate appearances at an ops+ of 125, Reyes has 2115 plate appearances with an ops+ of 100, the difference is pretty huge. Outside of the weak strikeout argument, which nobody has an idea why you are fascinated with a particular type of out. (an out is an out, it's already showing up in other numbers---re mentioning it, doesn't mean you count it negatively twice)

That's not a really good way to compare the two right now. Reyes has made the leap to a new level performance in the past year and that leap looks more and more like it is not an aberration. What he did post 2005 doesn't really mean that much in my humble opinion.

I suspect the interleague argument and the argument about how players perform when they change leagues siginficantly overstates the actual differences in the talent levels of these two very large groups of players. The trouble is, we don't have any other way to do it. Of course, that doesn't mean that either of these ways actually answers the question.

Why do you suspect this?

That's not a really good way to compare the two right now. Reyes has made the leap to a new level performance in the past year and that leap looks more and more like it is not an aberration. What he did post 2005 doesn't really mean that much in my humble opinion.

but his "leap" to a new level is a lot inferior to what Grady has been posting the past couple of seasons, Reyes "leap" was all the way up to 118 ops+, Grady has posted 135+ each of the last two seasons, and as pointed out, is still doing it at that level this season (mind you small sample size arguments apply) I really can't see how anyone could look at Grady and Reyes and conclude that Reyes is remotely close to Grady.

I really can't see how anyone could look at Grady and Reyes and conclude that Reyes is remotely close to Grady.

Sizemore was 135 in the year he turned 24 and is at 135 this year when he turns 25. He was 125 the year he turned 23.

Reyes was at 118 in the year he turned 23 and is now at 167 this year, during which he'll turn 24.

What's so comlplicated?

I really can't see how anyone could look at Grady and Reyes and conclude that Reyes is remotely close to Grady.

I think that is overstating it, but I think Grady is better.

And the article has Grady at #5 and Reyes at #7, so I'm not sure why we are splitting hairs. :)

But it seems like there's a lot of regression to the mean to expect from these recent AL stats. Sample sizes with groups of players or teams or, in this case, all of major league baseball, are far less impressive than they seem.

Yet you are projecting Grady's and Reyes' stats based on a month of games.

Yet you are projecting Grady's and Reyes' stats based on a month of games.

I'm not. I used the 2007 stats with Sizemore only regarding the high K-rate. Would those of you who maintain the out-is-an-out argument similarly conclude that there's no difference between Chien-Ming Wang and, say, Felix Herandez because they have the same bottom-line, career ERA+? Herandez is younger? Okay, how about Wang and Peavy? An out's an out, right?

you really think Reyes is a 167 ops+ hitter? If he breaks 120 this season Mets fans should be ecstatic.

Would those of you who maintain the out-is-an-out argument similarly conclude that there's no difference between Chien-Ming Wang and, say, Felix Herandez because they have the same bottom-line, career ERA+? Herandez is younger? Okay, how about Wang and Peavy? An out's an out, right?

Strikeouts are a much more important indicator for pitchers than they are for hitters. This is pretty basic stuff.

Would those of you who maintain the out-is-an-out argument similarly conclude that there's no difference between Chien-Ming Wang and, say, Felix Herandez because they have the same bottom-line, career ERA+? Herandez is younger? Okay, how about Wang and Peavy? An out's an out, right?

Now you are shifting your argument. Up to this point, I don't really see you saying "Sizemore has less upside unless he cuts down on his Ks." You've seemingly been arguing that the Ks make him a lesser player right now, with comments such as "he currently has gaping holes in his swing and, thus, his game."

For projections, Ks mean a lot. Particularly with pitchers. For current value, a K is basically the same as another out, with a slight negative value.

As an aside, since you mention him, I don't think Peavy will ever be as good as his K/BB suggest. He'll be good, but not worthy of #13 on this list. I have no proof of this.

Would those of you who maintain the out-is-an-out argument similarly conclude that there's no difference between Chien-Ming Wang and, say, Felix Herandez because they have the same bottom-line, career ERA+? Herandez is younger? Okay, how about Wang and Peavy? An out's an out, right?

Strikeouts are a much more important indicator for pitchers than they are for hitters. This is pretty basic stuff.

I'm not. I used the 2007 stats with Sizemore only regarding the high K-rate. Would those of you who maintain the out-is-an-out argument similarly conclude that there's no difference between Chien-Ming Wang and, say, Felix Herandez because they have the same bottom-line, career ERA+? Herandez is younger? Okay, how about Wang and Peavy? An out's an out, right?

You can't switch from hitters to pitchers like that.

Strikeouts aren't really that bad for batters for two main reasons - if you K, you avoid the DP, which is more likely to occur than reaching on error, and K's tend to be associated with additional power, most likely due to swinging with more speed and less control.

Strikeouts for pitchers are really good because there's no chance for anything bad to happen (ok, maybe a dropped third strike). The ball is never in play, so it's not dependent on the defense to convert it to an out (or to an extra-base hit).

This definitely is something of a paradox and a little unintuitive. David Pinto at baseballmusings (search for paradox) thinks Ks might not be debilitating for batters because the really high K guys never make the majors. The article that Pinto links too also has a good discussion of this.

Continuing in that vein, the real issue is when a batter's strikeout rate is too high. Mike Emeigh talks about this a lot. If someone strikes out in nearly 30% of their plate appearances (say Adam Dunn), they need either a really high walk rate or a really high BABIP (sometimes unreasonably high) to make up for it. Sizemore only struck out in about 20% of his plate appearances last year which didn't put him in the worst 50 with over 200 AB. Even this year he's only striking out in about 23% of his plate appearances. I don't think it's anything to worry about considering the rest of his game.

EQA for 2004, 2005, 2006:

Reyes: .234, .252, .294
Grady: .262, .295, .312

Average CF: .261
Average SS: .253

The Fielding Bible had Sizemore at +10 in 2005 and +10 in 2006, while Reyes was -10 in 2005 and +13 in 2006.

Dial had Reyes at +10 in 2006, with Sizemore at +7 in 2006.

MHS calculated what he called Poor Man's Super Linear Weights for last season.

Here are Sizemore and Reyes (hopefully that formats ok, I still can't figure out the pre tag):

Is that supposed to be in runs? If so, those baserunning numbers are wacky.

Is that supposed to be in runs? If so, those baserunning numbers are wacky.

Oh right. I didn't paste that part:

Legend
POS: The players primary position as defined by the Complete Base Ball Encyclopedia
RCAA: Runs Created Above Average (Batting Runs)
POS – ADJ: Position Adjustment
DEF: Defensive Runs
BASE RUN: Number of bases gained per Bill James handbook – and is converted to runs using 0.3 runs per base in the PM-SLWTS calculations.
PM-SLWTs: Poor Mans Super Linear Weights
PM-SLWTs/650: Poor Mans Super Linear Weights per 650 PA

So it's bases which are converted to runs by multiplying by .3

you really think Reyes is a 167 ops+ hitter? If he breaks 120 this season Mets fans should be ecstatic.

I know Met fans can go crazy with our Reyes fanboyism but this statement is overstating things in the other direction. Reyes posted a 118 OPS+ despite not hitting for the first two months of the season in 2006. More importantly, he already has posted a 167 OPS+ in the first fifth of the season, meaning that all he'd need to do post a 110 OPS+ the rest of the reason to post an OPS+ over 120.

I don't think anybody can make the argument that Reyes has been a better offensive player than Sizemore. I think that you can make the argument that Reyes currently is a better offensive player than Sizemore. Of course, it is an argument that doesn't have a whole lot of statistical support, but that doesn't make it wrong.

I did say or at least strongly implied that if Sizemore cut down his K-rate he'd signficantly improve. The one and only Billyshears picked up on it so I don't think it's too subtle. His K-rate suggests to me that it's less likely for him to continue the career progression that many foresee as being likely. I've used the 2007 sample just to say that there's no evidence he's addressed this flaw. Conversely, there is some evidence, though far from conclusive, that Reyes has improved his plate discipline, which had been his major flaw. I agree with him again in #92. And that is why I think it's unreasonable to maintain that there's a big gap between the players and that it's silly to even suggest that Reyes is as good as Sizemore (I'd prefer Reyes over Sizemore if I was starting an imaginary team, though I'd gladly take either). That's what was argued without much dissent earlier in this thread.

Cutting down on Ks doesn't mean increased plate discipline! Are you saying Adam Dunn doesn't have any plate discipline?
And why does Grady have to cut down on Ks to continue on whatever this career progression you are talking about? He maintains a healthy 2/1 K/BB ratio. Leading the league in XBH is not enough?
And if you look at post #50, you will notice that you don't have to cut down on Ks to have very good seasons.

If you want to say you think Reyes is better cos you are a Met fan, feel free to do so. To say that Grady is going to stagnate because he can't hit th e curve is ridiculous. its not like he is new to the league.

I know Met fans can go crazy with our Reyes fanboyism but this statement is overstating things in the other direction. Reyes posted a 118 OPS+ despite not hitting for the first two months of the season in 2006.

If you really wnt to go fan boy crazy simply replace Reye's April 2006 #s (250/.330/.380) with 2007's: .356/.442/.596
and declare that Reyes' performance over the Met's last 162 games is his true talent level

that would give him 127 runs, 87 rbi, a .320 average and a .527 slugging...

And that is why I think it's unreasonable to maintain that there's a big gap between the players and that it's silly to even suggest that Reyes is as good as Sizemore (I'd prefer Reyes over Sizemore if I was starting an imaginary team, though I'd gladly take either). That's what was argued without much dissent earlier in this thread.

With all due respect, I don't think that this is an accurate representation of what was being argued. The first mention of Sizemore was by you, when you said "Sizemore ahead of Reyes?" implying incredulity. You then proceeded to deny that Sizemore was a great player.

I don't believe anybody here claimed that Sizemore was so far ahead of Reyes that it was "silly to even suggest" that the two were equals. Where was this argued "without much dissent", or at all, earlier in this thread?

We're kind of in a golden age for hitting shortstops though, aren't we? I think there's good reason to believe that James's New Historical Baseball Abstract's rankings based on 120 (or so) years at the position aren't predictive of the dispersal of talent in the modern era.

It's also worth noting that this list includes 5 shorstops (Rollins ,Jeter, Tejada, Reyes, Ramirez, and this doesn't include ARod) and 4 centerfielders (Sizemore, Beltran, Andruw, Wells).

Not that this matters but I was surprised to find 4 second sackers on the list (Upton, Cano, Kendrick, Utley) which is a typically weak position.

I don't think so. It's really an outlier blip rather than any change in dispersal of talent. Rollins, Reyes and Hanley are very unusual. There doesn't seem to be any good hitting SSs in the minor league pipeline. Maybe Tulo? Many are already speculating that Brignac will need to move to 3B.

Meanwhile, good hitting CFs are not that rare. Just looking ahead - Upton, Young, Bruce, McCutcheon, Maybin, Fernando, etc.

The disparity in hitting talent is enormous. The point is that you can usually find a decent hitting CFer.

(Upton's going to have to move off 2B eventually)

"I did say or at least strongly implied that if Sizemore cut down his K-rate he'd signficantly improve. His K-rate suggests to me that it's less likely for him to continue the career progression that many foresee as being likely. I've used the 2007 sample just to say that there's no evidence he's addressed this flaw."

You also said that Sizemore was not great and that Silver overrated him in his article, and you've yet to come close to justifying either statement. As for his K Rate, it's up this year, and he's actually hitting better then he did last year so far.

"Conversely, there is some evidence, though far from conclusive, that Reyes has improved his plate discipline, which had been his major flaw."

It's not a major flaw, but Reyes is not going to hit for the power that Sizemore has, or the power that Sizemore is going to attain by the end of his career, unless you actually believe that Reyes is going to hit 30 triples this year.

"And that is why I think it's unreasonable to maintain that there's a big gap between the players and that it's silly to even suggest that Reyes is as good as Sizemore (I'd prefer Reyes over Sizemore if I was starting an imaginary team, though I'd gladly take either). That's what was argued without much dissent earlier in this thread."

Most of that was in reaction to your claim "I think there's a tendency to overrate the small market guys just like there's a tendency to overrate pitching and the majesty of the 1-0 game. It helps people justify that they're smarter than the average fan. But it's bunk." You also broke out the semantics with the word great, which really got people going.

Me, I think it's close, I've already said that I would take Reyes over Hanley, and I don't think Reyes is too far behind Grady, but I don't see how anyone can take Reyes over Grady until Reyes is actually, you know, better the Sizemore in some way, because Sizemore has the higher ceiling.

I don't believe anybody here claimed that Sizemore was so far ahead of Reyes that it was "silly to even suggest" that the two were equals. Where was this argued "without much dissent", or at all, earlier in this thread

There have been some that have argued this. They're wrong, since there are many reasons why Reyes would be more valuable than Sizemore. But I think that most here are in agreement that one can make a case for either projecting forward.

He maintains a healthy 2/1 K/BB ratio.

Not quite - his K/BB was 2.43 in 2004, 2.54 in 2005, 1.96 last year and 1.26 so far this year. Looks like a pretty good progression to me.