The New York Yankees made their second splashy, long-term commitment to a top-of-the-rotation starter yesterday, inking righty A.J. Burnett to a five-year, $82.5 million deal (which, by the way, Dave Cameron absolutely nailed in Burnett’s Free Agent Value piece).

It’s virtually impossible to predict with any degree of certainty how those mega-deals will play out in the long run, given the injury and attrition risks associated with pitchers. However, the Yankees are at the top of the revenue curve , and each additional win added to the club’s roster brings them significantly closer to a playoff appearance. With CC and A.J. now headed to the Bronx, the AL East boasts three absolutely terrifying rotations in Tampa, Boston and New York. Somewhere, a Blue Jays fan is weeping.

Using a mid-90’s fastball and a devastating curveball, Burnett has the repertoire to dominate. Few pitchers possess as much movement on their curve as A.J., whose power breaker has over six inches of horizontal and vertical break. In other words, it has more side-to-side motion than most sliders, while simultaneously “dropping” in the zone more than most 12-to-6 curves. Burnett’s 76.2 Contact% ranked 6th among all starters and is a testament to the quality of his stuff.

If only the conversation could end there. 32 in January, Burnett might as well come with an “if healthy” sign plastered to his forehead, as that qualifier has been and will continue to be attached to him. His injury history is too lengthy to list here, but elbow soreness (2006) and shoulder pain (2007) are the latest ailments to sideline the 6-5, 230 pounder.

Burnett has a long track record of missing bats, getting grounders and showing average control, and all three of those trends continued in 2008. While Burnett’s ERA rose from 3.75 in 2007 to 4.07 in 2008, that was more the product of an unusually high .328 BABIP (especially strange, given Toronto’s slick fielding). His Fielding Independent ERA (FIP) actually dropped from 4.33 in 2007 to 3.45 this past year, but very little changed in his controllable skills. Rather, his sky-high 17.7 HR/FB rate from ’07 regressed to a more average 9.6% this past season.

Burnett’s peripherals remain very strong, as he punched out 9.39 batters per nine innings and walked 3.5, generating grounders at a 48.5% clip. Using Expected Fielding Independent ERA (XFIP) from The Hardball Times (which evaluates pitchers based on strikeouts walks and a “normalized” HR rate), we find that Burnett’s last two campaigns were essentially of the same quality, with XFIP’s of 3.70 and 3.65.

Despite the rather smooth glovework done by the Blue Jays overall (+19 as a team in UZR, 3rd in Defensive Efficiency), Burnett had pretty poor luck on balls put in play. As previously mentioned when discussing Andy Pettitte, the Yankee gloves were less than ideal in ’08, with -39.4 UZR and a 25th-place finish in Defensive Efficiency. However, two of the team’s biggest culprits, Bobby Abreu (-25.2 UZR) and Jason Giambi (-1.8 UZR), appear unlikely to return, which should help matters. In addition, the rumored Melky Cabrera-for-Mike Cameron swap would improve things, as the soon-to-be 36 year-old Cameron can still run ’em down (9.7 UZR).

A groundball pitcher like Burnett will surely want to see better work from Robinson Cano, who was a plus defender in ’07 (8.1 UZR) but had a rough go of it in 2008 (-7.3 UZR). Derek Jeter had one of his better fielding years in 2008, but he still only managed to post a -0.4 UZR. The previous year he was at -18.4, and he’s been in the red every year we have UZR data going back to 2002.

While Burnett is an extremely talented hurler, his durability remains the great unknown. Burnett tossed a career-high 221.1 IP in 2008, and he didn’t experience health problems during the course of the season. However, the other two seasons in which Burnett crossed the 200-inning threshold both came with consequences. In 2002 as a Marlin, he tossed 204.1 innings. The following year, he made just four starts before succumbing to Tommy John surgery. Burnett again topped 200 innings in 2005 (209 IP). He made just 21 and 25 starts in 2006 and 2007, respectively, dealing with the aforementioned elbow and shoulder maladies.

Will Burnett remain healthy and productive in the Bronx? It’s worth gambling to find out. Just don’t place too high of a wager on his dominant but oft-damaged right arm.

The 2008 Seattle Mariners were, in many ways, difficult to watch. With a payroll in excess of $100 million, the M’s managed to lose 101 ballgames. Richie Sexson and Jose Vidro were compensated handsomely to do their best Mario Mendoza impressions, and shaky fielding behind some, ahem, questionable free agent starters only made matters worse. The M’s checked in at -32.8 UZR in ’08, ranking 24th in the majors. Combine mediocre hitting, pitching and fielding, and you have a high-priced disaster.

However, those grim days may very well be in the rear view mirror. The M’s unceremoniously dumped Bill Bavasi and company, bringing in well-regarded talent procurer Jack Zduriencik, who helped draft and develop Milwaukee’s extensive list of gifted youngsters. Jack Z has wasted little time altering his roster, signing a cheap and potentially useful first base platoon (Russell Branyan and Chris Shelton) and then pulling off a mind-bending 12-player trade that netted him seven players. Among those seven are Franklin Gutierrez and Endy Chavez, two of the rangiest outfielders in the game today.

The current Mariner’s depth chart features Chavez in left field, Gutierrez in center and Ichiro Suzuki in right. Suffice it to say, that group would go a long way toward improving Seattle’s lackluster defensive showing. Let’s see how the outfield fared in ’08 using UZR/150 (the number of runs above or below average a fielder is per 150 games) and John Dewan’s Plus/Minus system:

2008

Raul Ibanez (LF): -11 UZR/150, -18 Plus/Minus
Ichiro Suzuki (CF): 3.3 UZR/150, -9 Plus/Minus
Suzuki (RF): -0.2 UZR/150, +12 Plus/Minus
Wladimir Balentien (CF): -1.7 UZR/150, -2 Plus/Minus
Balentien (RF): -17.4 UZR, -3 Plus/Minus

I just listed the players seeing the most time in the outfield. As a team , The M’s outfield compiled:

LF: -14.9 UZR (-14.9 runs), -21 +/- (-16.8 runs)
CF: -3.4 UZR (-3.4 runs), -12 +/- (-9.6 runs)
RF: -7.2 UZR (-7.2 runs), +14 +/- (+11.2 runs)

As a whole, the M’s outfield was -25.5 runs below average by UZR and -15.2 runs by the Plus/Minus system (the big difference in RF is due to Dewan’s system liking Ichiro’s work there and UZR rating it as slightly below average).

Now, take a gander at the new-look Seattle D. For the sake of making this comparison easier, let’s assume that:
1. Chavez, Gutierrez and Suzuki all make 150 starts and play 1350 innings apiece.
2. The fielding metrics compiled by Gutierrez are docked 15% (it’s far from perfect, but it’s an attempt to account for the added difficulty of playing center), and Chavez and Suzuki play to the levels that they have shown in the corner spots during their respective careers. For Chavez, I added his equally stellar work in RF to his projection to make the sample size larger (the majority of his career has been spent in center).

LF Chavez: 20.3 UZR/150
CF Gutierrez: 18.3 UZR/150
RF Suzuki: 7.3 UZR/150

If this trio plays 150 games, they project to be nearly 46 runs above average with the leather. Compare that with the embarrassing work done by last year’s Ibanez-fueled, molasses-covered group: if the M’s get league-average defense from their extra outfielders (filling out the additional 12 game gap), that’s a swing of over 70 runs in outfield defense, or seven wins (!)

Keep Seattle’s insanely rangy outfield in mind on draft day, particularly when it comes to flyball-centric hurler Brandon Morrow (career 34.2 GB%). Great defense can make pitchers look a whole lot better, and the M’s new outfield projects to have a Tampa Bay-type turnaround in quality with three legitimate center fielders covering the gaps.

In terms of flashy major league debuts, no one can top Edwin Jackson. On his 20th birthday, the fireballing Dodgers rookie defeated Randy Johnson, punching out four batters in six scoreless innings. A 6th round pick in the 2001 draft, Jackson came equipped with an ideal pitcher’s frame (6-3, 190) and a fastball that crept up near triple digits at times. Considered one of the brightest prospects in a fertile Dodgers farm system, Jackson figured to play a prominent role in LA’s future.

That plan never came to fruition, however, as the German-born right-hander spent the 2004 and 2005 seasons sipping sour cups of coffee with the Dodgers (62 H, 42 R in 53.1 IP) and getting clobbered at hitter-friendly AAA Las Vegas (126 R in 145.1 IP). He found some measure of success upon a demotion to the AA Southern League in ’05 (6.4 K/9, 2.6 BB/9), but on the whole those two seasons were brutal. Los Angeles eventually grew tired of Jackson’s lack of progress and jettisoned him (along with lefty Chuck Tiffany) to Tampa Bay for Danys Baez and Lance Carter prior to the 2006 season.

Jackson more or less trudged along the same disappointing career path in 2006 (5.45 ERA) and 2007 (5.76) as well, before posting a mark below the league average for the first time in his career this past season. Still just 25 and coming off a campaign in which he shaved his ERA down to 4.42, Jackson only figures to get better, right?

Well, the Tigers certainly think so. The club shipped rangy, cost-controlled outfielder Matthew Joyce to the Rays to acquire Jackson’s services a few days ago in what Dave Cameron called a “ridiculously bad trade.” While Detroit’s starting staff ranked just 21st in WPA/LI and could use some external help, there just isn’t much evidence to suggest that their newest arm actually made significant progress in 2008.

In 2007, Jackson posted a 4.90 FIP. In 2008, despite the huge difference in ERA, that FIP figure remained static (4.88 FIP). While he knocked off over a walk per nine innings from his line (from 4.92 BB/9 in ’07 to 3.78 BB/9 in ’08), his strikeout rate dipped considerably, down from 7.16 per nine in 2007 to just 5.3 in 2008.

It wasn’t really Jackson that improved, but rather the defense around him. The dramatic shift in the quality of Tampa’s D has been well chronicled. After posting a gruesome -54.2 UZR in 2007, the Rays skyrocketed to +70.6 in ’08 (for those of you scoring at home, that’s about a twelve-and-a-half win swing). Jackson’s BABIP was .351 in 2007, but with the best defensive squad in the majors flanking him in 2008, that number dropped to .301. He also benefitted from stranding 76.1% of runners on base, well above his 69.7% career average.

Jackson is a great example of velocity not being everything for a pitcher. Despite routinely popping the catcher’s mitt at 94 MPH, Jackson’s swinging strike percentage was just 7.7% in 2008, slightly below the 7.8% average for starters. For comparison, former teammate Andy Sonnanstine (he of 87 MPH heat and four offspeed pitches) generated swinging strikes at a 7.3% clip and bested Jackson with 5.77 K/9. So, despite Jackson’s “stuff” advantage, he missed about the same number of bats as Sonny while walking over two times as many hitters (which, I guess, gives you an idea of why Andy is sticking around and Jackson is not).

While Jackson is still relatively young and it’s conceivable that he could improve, he’s no more than an adequate fifth starter at this point in time. Don’t be fooled by the superficial gains in his 2008 numbers: the only thing that changed about Jackson this past year was the quality of the defenders around him.

Any way that you want to slice and dice the numbers, the Rangers’ starting pitching staff was a Texas-sized embarrassment in 2008. The club bashed its way to a major league-best .278 Equivalent Average, scoring a whopping 902 runs along the way. Unfortunately, as good as the offense was, the team’s run prevention was poor enough to nullify all of those crooked numbers posted by Hamilton, Kinsler et al.

Name a Texas pitcher that took the hill, and odds are that his ERA resembled something that you’d see on the side of a Boeing jet. As a team, the Rangers’ starters authored an abhorrent 5.51 ERA, tying the Baltimore Orioles for the highest mark in the bigs (if Texas and Baltimore switched staffs, would anyone notice?) Even using WPA/LI to adjust for the hitter-happy tendencies of Arlington, the Rangers ranked just 25th in the bigs. In a clear sign of the Apocalypse, Sidney Ponson (released in June) “led” the staff in WPA/LI at 0.23. When Sir Sidney leads your staff in anything but surliness, you have a problem.

So, the vast majority of Texas’ starters were crappy, regardless of dimensions of their home ballpark. That’s not breaking news. However, the Rangers’ fielders did those starters no favors in 2008. While Texas featured some heavy hitters, several prominent players were lethargic with the leather.

David Appelman recently added yet another great feature to this site: Ultimate Zone Rating. Using a fielding model developed by Mitchel Lichtman, UZR allows us to calculate how many runs above or below average a fielder is per 150 games played (for further details and discussion, look here). Perusing the Texas team page, it becomes apparent that while the Rangers’ offense is strong up the middle, some of those runs are punted back on defense (and, in Young’s case, on offense as well):

CF Hamilton: -12.6 UZR/150
2B Kinsler: -4.4 UZR/150
SS Young: -3.7 UZR/150

Ramon Vazquez’s work at third base was enough to make Brooks Robinson weep (-19.2 UZR/150), but the free agent is unlikely to return to Texas. UZR isn’t the only fielding system that disapproves of this troika either, as John Dewan’s Plus/Minus system had Kinsler (-15 plays) Hamilton (-13) and Young (-7) all in the red as well. That combined -35 showing translates to about 28 runs below average. Another slugger, Chris Davis, will likely see action at the hot corner next season. It’s too small of a sample to mean much, but the 6-4, 235 pounder was -3 plays in 404 innings at first base, -9 in 276 innings at third and comes with spotty defensive scouting reports.

You might be asking yourself, why does this matter? Texas’ starters are hazardous to being with, so who cares if the defense makes things worse? While it’s true that many of the club’s starters have been downright repugnant over the past few seasons, the Rangers do have a considerable wave of young arms emerging. Eric Hurley, Tommy Hunter and Matt Harrison have already made their debuts. Higher-tier hurlers like Derek Holland and Neftali Feliz reached AA in ’08, and are blazing a trail to the majors that could place them in Arlington sometime during the 2009 season.

While these prospects should still be kept on the radar screen, it is important to keep in mind the context in which they will be placed: pitching in a bandbox (Rangers Ballpark in Arlington increased run production by seven percent from 2006-2008) in front of iron-gloved defenders.

When Kosuke Fukudome came stateside last offseason, expectations were fairly high. After all, the longtime Chunichi Dragons stud compiled a .305/.397/.543 career line in Japan, winning the league’s Central League MVP as well as taking home gold in the inaugural World Baseball Classic in 2006. Intrigued by his broad base of skills, the Chicago Cubs inked Fukudome to a four-year, $48 million deal.

While Fukudome’s power numbers figured to take a hit upon transitioning to Major League Baseball, his translated numbers still figured to be pretty lofty. Baseball Prospectus 2008 called the 31 year-old “someone who can get on base at a .390 or .400 clip while contributing in all facets of the game.” PECOTA called for a .289/.401/.504 line, and Fukudome’s most comparable players were promising: J.D. Drew, Jim Edmonds and Fred Lynn ranked prominently on the list.

Fukudomania swept the Windy City last spring, as the lefty batter got off to a searing start. He batted .327/.436/.480 in March and April, drawing a Bondsian 19 walks in 117 PA. May was also productive, if less powerful, as he hit .293/.388/.404 with 16 free passes in the same number of plate appearances. As the Cubs entered summer, Fukudome continued to contribute by posting a .264/.387/.402 line in June.

It was at that point, however, that the wheels fell off. July was a tough month (.236/.306/.382), but we hadn’t seen anything yet: August brought forth a sickly .193/.293/.253 showing that would make Tony Pena Jr. blush, and Fukudome’s descent continued into September and early October (.178/.288/.289).

So, what the heck caused Fukudome to transform him from an on-base fiend to an offensive drag who ended up plastered to the Cubs bench down the stretch? To try and answer that question, I examined Fukudome’s pitch data over the course of the season. I figured that as opposing pitchers became more familiar with Fukudome, they might have discovered a weakness in his game that would present itself in an increase (or decrease) in certain pitches thrown.

As it turns out, essentially nothing changed in terms of pitch selection as the 6-0, 187 pounder shifted from Fukudomania to Fukufourthoutfielder. And as I dug deeper into his tale of two seasons, it became apparent that lady luck had an effect on the proceedings. Here’s a look at some of Fukudome’s key indicators over his red-hot start and ice-cold finish:

March through June

340 PA 15.5 BB%, 19.5 K%, 20.1 LD%, 50.9 GB%, .133 ISO, .349 BABIP

July through October

250 PA, 11.8 BB%, 22.5 K%, 17.8 LD%, 50.1 GB%, .105 ISO, .251 BABIP

Sure, there are some differences between the two stretches, but nothing that comes close to explaining the gargantuan shift in performance. Rather, it seems that Fukudome had some pretty awful luck on balls in play from July onward. With each passing month, fewer and fewer ducksnorts fell in for hits:

Fukudome’s BABIP by month:

April/March: .392
May: .325
June: .317
July: .306
August: .217
September/Oct.: .194

While Lou Pinella seemed to lose confidence in his new right fielder as the season progressed, it doesn’t appear as though Fukudome’s true talent level changed all that much. In all probability, Fukudome is neither the star of April nor the scrub of September.

On the whole, Fukudome batted .257/.359/.379 with a refined approach at the plate (13.9 BB%, 20 O-Swing%). His strikeout rate was a little high (20.8%) and his .122 ISO was very tame for a corner outfielder. Luckily for Fukudome and the Cubs, his stellar defensive work (13.4 UZR per 150 games in RF) might mean that he could shift to center, putting less of an onus on his modest pop.

Of course, that won’t change Fukudome’s value in the vast majority of leagues, but he is still someone to consider taking a flyer on. Most people will focus on his finish, where he endured a see-a-black-cat, walk-under-a-dozen-ladders unlucky BABIP stretch, but Fukudome could be a good source of OBP in the later rounds.

When Carlos Zambrano broke into the major leagues in 2001, he was the epitome of power pitching. The burly 6-5, 255 pounder pumped mid-90’s gas, and though he didn’t always know where it was headed, he racked up big strikeout totals. Zambrano punched out over 7 batters per nine innings between 2002 and 2003, before graduating into 8 K/9 territory. He whiffed 8.07 per nine in 2004 and 8.14/9 in 2006, before culminating at 8.83 K/9 in 2006.

However, as Big Z was racking up the K’s, his control was suffering. After walking about three-and-a-half batters per nine innings in ’04 and ’05, his BB/9 rocketed to 4.84 in 2006. Despite the higher strikeout rates, Zambrano’s controllable skills were headed in the wrong direction:

Zambrano’s Fielding Independent ERA’s, 2003-2006:

2003: 3.47
2004: 3.57
2005: 3.70
2006: 4.14

In 2007, Zambrano’s control took a (relative) step in the right direction, as he cut his walk rate to 4.20 batters per nine innings. However, that improvement seemed to come with a cost, as Zambrano’s K rate fell to 7.36/9. That shift produced further slippage in his FIP, as Big Z posted a career-high 4.58 mark.

Zambrano’s halted his rapidly ascending FIP in 2008, posting a 4.23 figure. He showed further improvement with the free passes (his 3.43 BB/9 was the lowest mark of his career), but Zambrano’s refined control came at the further expense of his strikeout rate. Big Z struck out a downright pedestrian 6.2 batters per nine innings, a far cry from his work just a few seasons prior.

While some might still categorize Zambrano as a power arm, he doesn’t really seem to fit the description anymore. Big Z once lit up the radar guns, but his fastball velocity has dipped in each of the past four seasons:

Zambrano’s fastball velocity, 2005-2008:

2005: 92.8 MPH
2006: 92.2 MPH
2007: 91.6 MPH
2008: 91.3 MPH

The 2008 version of Zambrano was at least more economical with his pitches. He posted his lowest pitches per plate appearance (3.80) and pitches/IP (16.0) since 2003. Big Z has also become more adept at getting batters to chase his offerings outside of the strike zone. His O-Swing% during his high-K 2006 season was 19.8%, but that figure climbed to 25.3% in 2007 and 25.7% this past season. With more pitches being thrown around the strike zone, batters seem less apt to lay off in hopes of coaxing a walk.

The combination of decreased velocity, K’s and walks leads one to believe that Zambrano is making an effort to show better control and put the ball around the plate more often. However, that improved command has significantly cut into his number of swings and misses generated. Once one of the more difficult starting pitchers to make contact with, Zambrano now ranks in the middle of the pack:

Zambrano’s Contact%, 2005-2008

2005: 77.9%
2006: 78.1%
2007: 78.8%
2008: 82.5%

It’s difficult to be very enthusiastic about the new, lower-octane Zambrano. Sure, his control is better. But he’s not going to be confused with Curt Schilling or Mike Mussina any time soon, and his whiff rate has dipped to the point where he’s actually below the NL league average of 6.99 in that department.

A pitcher can certainly be successful with a moderate K rate and worm-burning skills, but typically that sort of profile also requires the ability to paint the corners. Zambrano has improved in that regard, but his gains in the walk department still leave his control rating as just ordinary. When you combine a league-average K rate with a league-average walk rate, you get…a league average pitcher.

Still just 27, Zambrano has already accumulated nearly 1,400 innings on his right arm. That’s a Herculean workload, one that appears to be taken some bite off of his pitches. Courtesy of Baseball-Reference, we find that Zambrano’s most comparable player through age 27 is Ramon Martinez.

Like Zambrano, Martinez routinely crossed the 200-inning mark in his early 20’s, compiling plenty of strikeouts and walks along the way. However, such a massive workload at such a young age cut Martinez’s career short. Martinez’s major league career was effectively over by the age of 30 when his shoulder gave out, though he trudged on a little longer before calling it quits at 33. Perhaps Big Z finds his fastball zip this offseason, but all signs point to his days as a certifiable ace being over. As Martinez can attest, few youthful pitchers overcome such arduous innings totals to enjoy a lengthy career.

Giants outfielder Fred Lewis got his first chance at everyday playing time in 2008, but he traveled a long, winding road to get that shot. Originally drafted by the Montreal Expos out of Mississippi Gulf Coast Community College in 2000, Lewis opted not to sign and instead attended Southern University. The Giants came calling in 2002, popping Lewis in the second round (66th overall).

Matt Lawton’s cousin showed excellent on-base skills in the minors (career .381 OBP, 15.1 BB%). He also ranked among Baseball America’s top 10 organizational prospects from 2003-2007 in what was then a rather barren Giants farm system. Still, some felt that Lewis was more fourth outfielder than future regular. BA noted that Lewis was “still more about potential than production”, as he was prone to strikeouts and didn’t harness his raw speed on the base paths or in the outfield.

In 2007, Lewis’ official position on the Giants was “Barry Bonds‘ legs.” As a late-inning defensive replacement who snuck in the occasional at-bat, Lewis compiled a .287/.374/.408 line in 180 PA, drawing walks at a 10.8% rate and striking out 20.4% of the time. “Bonds’ Legs” also managed to become one of the more anonymous players to hit for the cycle, accomplishing the feat on May 13th at Coors Field.

Once that Bonds guy not-so-willingly retired, Lewis inherited plenty of playing time and made the most of it. A first-time regular at the age of 27, Lewis batted .282/.351/.440 in 521 PA. He continued to show a pretty sharp eye, drawing walks at a 9.8% clip while rarely straying from the strike zone. Lewis’ Outside Swing Percentage (O-Swing%) was just 18.9%, ranking as the 19th-lowest total among all qualified hitters. Lewis also swiped 21 bags and took full advantage of AT&T Park’s “Triples Alley”, collecting nine three-baggers on the season (fun fact: AT&T increased triples production by 32% between 2006-2008, per The Bill James Handbook).

The 6-2, 198 pounder batted .282 this past season, but that number seems likely to regress somewhat. Lewis often swung and missed at the minor league level (24.5 K%), and that tendency continued in 2008 (26.5 K%). His BABIP was also pretty high at .367. While that total figures to drop somewhat too, Lewis might have the sort of speedy profile to sustain a BABIP higher than what his LD% alone would indicate. In addition to the 20+ steals, Lewis was a +13 base runner overall, per Bill James’ Base Running Net Gain statistic (discussed in more detail here). Lewis likely has the wheels to make those worm killers (career 54.4 GB%) count.

It took him a while to get an opportunity, but Fred Lewis looks like a solid major league player. With a patient approach, the ability to swipe some bags and moderate pop (.158 ISO), Lewis could be an asset to both the Giants and fantasy owners over the next few seasons.

Ladies and gentleman: ready your pitchforks. Light your torches. Today, I am going to commit baseball sacrilege. I come not to bury the Yankee Captain, but I must point out that in many respects, Derek Jeter’s 2008 campaign was the worst of his career.

This past season, Jeter posted just a 0.26 WPA/LI, the lowest full-season mark of his distinguished career and a middling 8th among 17 qualified shortstops. Jeter’s .408 slugging percentage, .107 Isolated Power (ISO) and .343 wOBA were also career lows.

Since an outstanding 2006 season (.343/.417/.483), Jeter’s production has taken a sizeable hit in each of the past two years. Using the same formula to convert wOBA into runs above average that we employed while examining Miguel Cabrera, it becomes apparent that the 1992 first-rounder has been hemorrhaging offensive value:

2006

Jeter’s wOBA: .399
AL LG wOBA: .339

37.3 Runs Above Average

2007

Jeter’s wOBA: .369
AL LG wOBA: .338

19.25 Runs Above Average

2008

Jeter’s wOBA: .343
AL LG wOBA: .335

4.65 Runs Above Average

Granted, 2006 was one of Jeter’s better seasons with the bat, but he has lost over three wins of offensive value since that point.

While Jeter has shown pretty solid pop for a shortstop in his career (.458 SLG, .142 ISO), he has often put the ball on the grass. His groundball percentage has hovered between 56.1% and 60% over the past four seasons, and sits at 55.6% for his career. With pretty solid speed and a line-drive bat (career 20.8 LD%), Jeter has consistently posted high Batting Average On Balls in Play (BABIP) marks (.361 career). However, it seems as though those skills might be in the process of eroding. Jeter’s 17.9 LD% in 2008 was the lowest mark that Fan Graphs has going back to 2002, and his .336 BABIP was the second-lowest of his career.

While it’s possible that his BABIP drop was just a blip, it seems pretty unlikely. Our own Peter Bendix recently co-authored a study on Expected BABIP at The Hardball Times, which introduced a more comprehensive and accurate way of measuring XBABIP for hitters. Among the facets of a player’s game that bode well for XBABIP are batting eye, line drive percentage, speed score and pitches per plate appearance. His batting eye (0.61 BB/K) was essentially unchanged (0.59 career) and his 3.7 P/PA was normal, but Jeter has shown significant erosion in the other two categories As mentioned before, Jeter’s 2008 LD% was his lowest mark by a decent margin, and it appears as though the captain’s wheels are grinding to a halt.

Using Bill James’ Speed Score, we can get a better read on Jeter’s speed (or lack thereof) in recent seasons. Speed Score is found by calculating a player’s score in five categories: stolen base percentage, stolen base attempts, triples, runs scored per times on base and number of times grounded into a double play. By adding all five categories up and dividing by five, you get the player’s Speed Score. Speed Scores range from 0-10, with the average player posting a number in the range of five. If you want the full details on the formula used, take a look here.

Here are Jeter’s Speed Scores over the past three seasons…

2006

SB%: 8.09
SB Attempts: 5.77
Triples: 2.96
Runs: 7.62
GDP: 5.87

Total Speed Score: 6.06

2007

SB%: 4
SB Attempts: 4.61
Triples: 3.08
Runs: 7.03
GDP: 3.03

Total Speed Score: 4.49

2008

SB%: 4.17
SB Attempts: 4.03
Triples: 3
Runs: 6.62
GDP: 1.4

Total Speed Score: 3.84

Since 2006, Jeter has gone from possessing above-average speed to posting a Speed Score more commensurate with a first base/DH type. Another Bill James stat, Base Running Net Gain, also showcases Jeter’s slowing game. Base Running Net Gain compares a player to the league average in: advancing from first base to third base, second to home, first to home, ground into double play percentage, and stolen base percentage. A swift runner for most of his career (with a net base running gain of +76), Jeter is now below-average:

2006: +24 Net Bases
2007: +9 Net Bases
2008: -13 Net Bases

Not surprisingly, Jeter’s XBABIP under Peter’s system has fallen each year as well: .339 in ’06, .332 in ’07 and .310 this past season. With a three-year decline in LD% and rapidly deteriorating speed, Jeter’s BABIP drop looks like a significant trend, not just an anomaly. Posting a GB% near sixty was okay for the lithe, peak-career version of Derek Jeter, who possessed the athleticism to beat out fielders and reach base on infield hits. However, it’s a much less viable strategy for the current, decline-phase Jeter, who appears to be squarely in the clutches of father time.

I realize that criticizing Jeter is sort of the baseball equivalent of bashing Santa Claus, but there are undeniably a number of concerning trends here. A five year decline in ISO..a three year decline in LD%…a high GB% without the requisite speed to make those worm-burners count. I don’t really see a “flotation device”, a skill to fall back on. It sounds downright odd to say, but you might just want to avoid that Jeter guy on draft day.

Feeling none too comfortable with the prospect of an in-house option taking over at shortstop, the St. Louis Cardinals went out and acquired Khalil Greene from the San Diego Padres. The 13th overall selection in the 2002 amateur draft, Greene was picked up in exchange for relief prospect Mark Worrell and a player to be named later. While Greene’s production went south in 2008, he still constitutes a decent value for the Cardinals, considering his $6.5 million price tag.

In sort of the inverse of the Matt Holliday trade, the first thought that will go through many heads about this swap is that Greene is now liberated. His offensive production is going to trend up now that he’s out of the treacherous environs of Petco Park. And certainly, that’s true to some extent. However, it would very likely be incorrect to assume that Greene’s career road numbers (.270/.318/.484) constitute his true talent level. By making such an assumption, one would be ignoring half of Greene’s career data, giving us a smaller and less reliable sample size. Rather than just tossing aside his home stats (.225/.289/.369), we can use context-neutral measures to get a better gauge on just what sort of hitter Greene has been over the past several years.

Luckily, Fangraphs has just such a context-neutral stat in WPA/LI. WPA/LI expresses offensive wins (without the leverage aspect of Win Probability Added), and is park adjusted. Using WPA/LI, we can evaluate Greene’s bat free of the run-suppressing tendencies of his home ballpark. Here are Greene’s WPA/LI numbers from 2004-2008, with his mark among qualified shortstops in parentheses:

2004: 0.16 (9/23)
2005: 0.55 (9/25)
2006: -0.48 (15/27)
2007: 1.69 (5/27)
2008: -1.56 (21/24)

Prior to 2008’s statistical face plant (more on that later), Greene had essentially been in the middle of the pack offensively among shortstops. Playing half of his games in a brutal offensive environment, the 29 year-old is a career .248/.304/.427 hitter. If we want to get a more accurate barometer of what his triple-slash lines would look like had he played in a neutral offensive environment, we can do that by using the amazing Baseball-Reference website.

B-R has a Play Index tool that adjusts a player’s production to fit particular run-scoring environments and home ballparks. Using this tool, we can place each year of Greene’s career in a neutral National League ballpark, adjusting for the Runs/Game average of that season to root out the effects of Petco. Here are Greene’s actual slash statistics, followed by his lines adjusted to a neutral NL ballpark:

2004 (4.64 NL Runs/G):

Actual: .273/.349/.446 Adjusted: .292/.371/.473

2005 (4.45 NL Runs/G):

Actual: .250/.296/.431 Adjusted: .262/.309/.451

2006 (4.76 NL Runs/G):

Actual: .245/.320/.427 Adjusted: .254/.330/.444

2007 (4.71 NL Runs/G):

Actual: .254/.291/.468 Adjusted: .263/.302/.483

2008 (4.54 NL Runs/G):

Actual: .213/.260/.339 Adjusted: .225/.274/.359

As mentioned earlier, Greene is a career .248/.304/.427 hitter. By taking his adjusted lines and weighing each year based on his number of plate appearances, I found that Greene’s career adjusted batting line is .261/.318/.447.

So, adjusting for Petco Park, Green has basically been a .260/.320/.450-type hitter. That’s pretty useful from a shortstop, both in real and fantasy baseball. However, what are we to make of Greene’s wretched performance this past season? Already a free swinger, Greene swung at just about everything in 2008, including birds, small aircrafts and, evidently, storage chests. His Outside Swing Percentage (O-Swing%) has been steadily rising over the past few years. Not coincidentally, so has his First Pitch Strike Percentage (F-Strike%):

2005: 22.7 O-Swing%, 58.2 F-Strike%
2006: 25.6 O-Swing%, 59 F-Strike%
2007: 29.2 O-Swing%, 60.4 F-Strike%
2008: 34.8 O-Swing%, 65 F-Strike%

To be sure, Greene is going to have to get his hacking tendencies in check if he’s going to bounce back to his 2004-2007 offensive levels. However, he did seem to suffer some poor fortune on balls put in play in 2008. Despite a 20.6 Line Drive Percentage (LD%), Greene posted just a .262 BABIP.

A below-average BABIP is nothing new for Greene, however, as his career mark sits at .285 despite a career 19.5 LD%. Greene is a pretty extreme flyball hitter (his 47.6 FB% in ’08 ranked 8th among all batters). Considering the spacious dimensions of Petco, it doesn’t seem unreasonable to suggest that Green’s below-average BABIP is at least somewhat the product of his skills being ill-suited to his home ballpark. However, a recent study that Peter Bendix co-authored about expected BABIP for The Hardball Times suggests that Greene was not as unlucky as LD% alone would make him out to be (under Peter’s model, Greene’s XBABIP is only slightly better at .271).

New Busch Stadium has played like a pitcher’s park during its first three seasons, suppressing runs by six percent and home runs by 16 percent. That’s not ideal for a flyball-oriented hitter like Greene, but it’s still an improvement over his previous home environment (over that same time frame, Petco has decreased run production by 20 percent and HR production by 19 percent). If Greene eases up on his ever-expanding strike zone, he should be worth a draft pick in deeper leagues. However, anyone taking Greene’s career road numbers and expecting him to reproduce them over a full season is more than likely going to be disappointed.

Quick: name the catcher with the highest slugging percentage (minimum 270 plate appearances) in 2008. Geovany Soto? No. Kelly Shoppach? Nope. Brian McCann? Closer, but not quite.

The answer, believe it or not, is Mike Napoli, with a whopping .586 mark. While the Angels backstop has yet to receive a full-time job in his three big league seasons, he has proven more than capable of crushing the ball on a regular basis.

Yes, Napoli does strike out. A lot. In 714 career at-bats, the 27 year-old has whiffed at a 31.2% clip. However, unlike Cleveland’s Shoppach (another high power, low contact catcher) Napoli combines his extra-base pop with a very keen batting eye. He posted a rock-solid .374 OBP in the minors, and that plate patience has carried over to the majors rather seamlessly. Napoli has drawn free passes 14.3% of the time, rarely straying outside of the strike zone (23.4 O-Swing%). Napoli’s batting average won’t be pretty, but he possesses the walks and power to remain a very productive hitter.

Napoli’s power is impressive regardless of his position, but it’s downright heavenly for a catcher. Owner of a career .493 slugging percentage and a gargantuan .245 ISO, Napoli took his slugging exploits to even greater levels last year. Granted, it was only 274 PA, but Napoli’s .313 ISO was the best of any batter receiving at least 270 PA, surpassing demi-god/cyborg Albert Pujols (.296), and his wOBA of .399 ranked 15th in the big leagues.

The Angels’ 17th-round pick in the 2000 draft has yet to receive a full-time gig for two reasons: 1.) Napoli suffered ankle and hamstring injuries in 2007, as well as a shoulder ailment in 2008 and 2.) the Angels have taken a liking to catch-and-throw backstop Jeff Mathis. Mathis was once a well-regarded prospect himself, but offense dried up upon reaching AAA Salt Lake City, and he has authored a sickly .195/.272/.326 line in 589 career PA. It is pretty difficult to conceive of a scenario where Mathis’ defense atones for that sort of offensive performance (and, Napoli actually posted better caught stealing percentages in 2006 and 2007, before Mathis bested him in ’08 while Napoli dealt with a shoulder injury).

Mike Napoli might not be as well known as some other players who don the tools of ignorance, but his potent bat makes him an intriguing choice on draft day. Napoli may miss a few games with some bumps and bruises, and Brad Ausmus proxy Mathis could steal a start here and there. But how many catcher possess secondary skills of this caliber? The Bill James projection system forecasts a .252/.361/.512 line for Napoli in 449 AB, with a whopping 31 home runs. Perhaps you might think that’s a tad optimistic, but even more conservative estimates would place Napoli among the top-hitting catchers in the major leagues. If you want an Angelic performance from your starting catcher, Nab Napoli while you still can.