The other thing that makes me wonder about Jones is that Willie Mays was still an average to slightly below avg. CF into his early 40's. Jones became a shitty LF at 32. That doesn't seem consistent with a "best of all time" CF. Basically, as soon as Jones left Atl, his defensive numbers cratered (+19 at 31, -6 at 32).

Maybe it was something in Atl (positioning, pitching staff, etc. ) that was creating the huge D numbers?

Andruw had intermittent knee problems (of the nagging sort, not the crippling sort) during his later years with Atlanta. Combine that with the extra heft he was carrying around, and it isn't particularly perplexing what happened. His first year in LA, he had to have knee surgery less than 2 months into the season.

And yet the stats show him to be a full win better on defense, per season, than Mays.

One theory on this, which I will not attempt to prove, is that Glavine and especially Maddux were unusually consistent and effective in implementing a defensive game plan. In the late 90's, Jones was constantly making perfect reads (as if he knew what was coming) then swooping in to grab loopers, pop-ups and liners. Those pitchers plus that fielder seemed to be working together to get outs.

In other words, Jones may not have been more skilled than Mays as an outfielder, but his team really did derive more value from his excellence.

Andruw was a useful piece his first season in New York, but--and I don't know if this is because he was playing more than expected or what--by the All-Star break this past season he played like he was wearing concrete spikes.

One theory on this, which I will not attempt to prove, is that Glavine and especially Maddux were unusually consistent and effective in implementing a defensive game plan. In the late 90's, Jones was constantly making perfect reads (as if he knew what was coming) then swooping in to grab loopers, pop-ups and liners. Those pitchers plus that fielder seemed to be working together to get outs.

In other words, Jones may not have been more skilled than Mays as an outfielder, but his team really did derive more value from his excellence.

If true, much of that value belongs to the pitchers.

If true, much of that value belongs to the pitchers.

Not if the plan only worked with Andruw. His reads were preternatural.

I think if Andruw was getting some magic Maddux/Glavine/Cox-positioning bonus, you would have seen something similar with Grissom, who was the CF in 1995 and 1996. He's the only other CF to play behind both those guys for multiple full seasons. But from 1992-1998, Grissom's lowest two RField scores are from those two years in ATL.

Not if the plan only worked with Andruw. His reads were preternatural.

it would work with Mays, or Devon White, or Gary Pettis? I find that hard to believe.

Maybe. But regardless, I don't think Maddux and Glavine were performing some magic that made him look better. I think he was just fantastic about reading the ball off the bat (and sometimes just off where the catcher set up).

You seem to be working off the first principle that he can't possibly be the best ever, and then coming up with theories to support it. Maybe you should just stick with the simplest explanation: the guy who many people thought was the greatest CF of all time and whose stats agree was in fact probably just that.

The other point I would make is that you aren't comparing like quantities when you look at Mays' and Jones' fielding numbers. They aren't calculated the same way. The newer numbers are sounder, and the older ones involve more estimation. I wouldn't doubt for a minute that Mays' true peaks are being obscured. So if Jones being better than Mays bothers you, it probably makes more sense to quibble with the latter's numbers.

If his reads were preternaturally good, then he should still have been an excellent CF when old and fat. Preternaturally good reads enable you to waddle effectively to where the ball is; only the most difficult chances should be missed.

I don't believe he was better than Mays; we do know that Maddox and Glavine were two of the best control pitchers of all time and Smoltz was no slouch.

You seem to be working off the first principle that he can't possibly be the best ever, and then coming up with theories to support it. Maybe you should just stick with the simplest explanation: the guy who many people thought was the greatest CF of all time and whose stats agree was in fact probably just that.

I don't think Snapper is averse to the idea that he's the best CF ever. I think he questions the idea that peak Andruw Jones was leaps and bounds better than everyone else that ever played the position. And that's a skepticism that isn't his alone.

(59) Exactly. The stats aren't saying that Jones is just better than Mays, Blair, D White, Pettis,etc. They're saying he's as far beter than them as they are above average.

That's simply not credible to me.

Late to the thread … I ran comps for Jones, and chose two different approaches, which result in weirdly separate lists. Both are centered on Andruw in terms of OPS+ and PAs. This one is a bit more wide in terms of those values, but limited to CF, 2B, SS, and C:



And that's a list where the better fielders reach the HOF, for sure. But they're not real close to Jones as offensive players, or in career length, except for Herman. So I tried it another way, narrowing the offensive and career-length parameters but including any position:



That's intriguing. Ichiro has an unconventional HOF case based just on his MLB years, and so does Beltre, so far; and so, of course, does Andruw. Meanwhile, you've got players as diverse as Fred Tenney (old-timey glove man at 1B) and Carlos Lee, who is an intriguingly close comp in terms of total offensive career (also a HR hitter, and, to be charitable, not the most svelte of men in his 30s, either).

IOW, after a couple seconds' work here, I got nothing except to pile on and say that the man's entire HOF case is in that gobsmackingly amazing RField column. It's just a shame, as snapper says, that Jones turned so young into something so at odds with his initial image. It's as if Nolan Ryan had turned into a slow groundball pitcher and hung around throwing late-inning forkballs in relief for a few years after 30 and then vanished.

It's as if Nolan Ryan had turned into a slow groundball pitcher and hung around throwing late-inning forkballs in relief for a few years after 30 and then vanished.

So that is what this has to do with Frank Tanana ...

If his reads were preternaturally good, then he should still have been an excellent CF when old and fat.

Uh, late 20s Andruw was not exactly the svelt young guy he came up as. Every single year, there were articles about his balooning ass, or how much he loved his momma's home cooking in the off-season. And he was still great. Then he got even fatter and had knee problems.

I don't think Snapper is averse to the idea that he's the best CF ever. I think he questions the idea that peak Andruw Jones was leaps and bounds better than everyone else that ever played the position. And that's a skepticism that isn't his alone.

Ok, but I don't get where that's coming from. His defensive stats don't say that he's an order of magnitude above everyone else or something crazy. His peak numbers fall right in line with other elite CFs of his era. Just look at the single season leaderboard.

(59) Exactly. The stats aren't saying that Jones is just better than Mays, Blair, D White, Pettis,etc. They're saying he's as far beter than them as they are above average.

They aren't saying that at all. His peaks are in line with other peak CFs of his era. The difference is that he was able to maintain that level for much longer and much more consistently. Both White and Jones (and Erstad and Bourn and Griffey and Puckett) have gotten into that +30 range at their best. What separates Andruw is that he was able to stay a +20 guy through his late twenties when he grew a second butt and lost a step or three, due in large part to his fantastic defensive instincts.

We don't have great defensive stats for old guys like Mays; the underlying data just isn't good enough. But that doesn't make the stats for recent guys wrong (though, of course, as with all D stats, they could be); it just means the older guys might be underrated a bit.

From that point on he has put up 2047 PA's where he hit .214/.314/.420 Over 2000 PA's !!

You realize that's not too far off the major league average, right? The batting average is deplorable, but we don't care about batting average once we know OBP and SLG (HOF voters probably do though). With the exception of the Dodgers year (which is really inexplicable) Andruw was roughly an average player overall over the last 4 years of his career. He actually hit very well with the Rangers and his first year with the Yankees.

IMO, Jones is with Beltran and Jimmy Ed. Andruw and Jimmy are practically the same player with highly regarded defense, a great peak and a swift decline. That might be the biggest thing hurting him as no voter is likely to vote in all three of those guys and there might be vote splitting. I suppose Beltran could make himself a lock with a few more good seasons and he might be able to avoid the log jam.

Andruw's at 60 bWAR - around guys like Dave Winfield, Richie Ashburn, Andre Dawson, Reggie Smith. He's at 72 fWAR, which has a higher replacement level but also rates his defense higher. Here he's about as good as Robin Yount and Ozzie Smith.

So he's definitely a solid candidate to me, ahead of many guys currently in the HOF, but obviously his odds of getting in are long.

Maybe it was something in Atl (positioning, pitching staff, etc. ) that was creating the huge D numbers?

Or maybe it's that fat players who don't condition themselves at all suffer steep declines in defense. Does anyone have WOWY numbers for Jones? That's what we should be using for career defense anyway.

I agree that Andruw is not 10 runs per season better than Mays, but as Barnaby says I think it's much more likely the problem is with Mays' defensive numbers, not Jones'.

Bill James mailbag today:

acknowledging that Andruw Jones was a very good center fielder and accepting that the Defensive measurements you are referencing have value, I would remain extremely skeptical of the claim that he was the greatest defensive center fielder ever or that he had twice the defensive value of Willie Mays. It would seem to me more likely than not that his defensive statistics are colored by some contextual influence that we don't understand yet, but will understand in twenty years. Thus, I would be unwilling to make a Hall of Fame argument for him based on his defensive numbers.