Projections: Adrian Beltre
by Edgar for Pres on Apr 7, 2009 9:44 AM PDT
66 comments
We projected Ichiro last week and Felix the other day.
You know the deal. How do you think Beltre will do this year? Continue his godly defense and have the offensive year we have always wanted now that he is healthy. Field a little more like a human and maintain his underappreciated hitting. Or revert back to 2005 Beltre who swung at every outside slider given to him. You chose.
| Season | Team | Batting | Fielding | Replacement | Positional | Value Runs | Value Wins | Dollars | Salary |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total * | - - - | 62.7 | 92.7 | 149.4 | 15.6 | 320.5 | 31.5 | $107.0 | $62.1 |
| 2002 | Dodgers | -2.3 | 19.8 | 21.2 | 2.5 | 41.1 | 4.1 | $10.7 | $2.8 |
| 2003 | Dodgers | -7.8 | 15.6 | 20.3 | 2.5 | 30.6 | 3.0 | $8.4 | $3.7 |
| 2004 | Dodgers | 55.3 | 22.6 | 21.9 | 2.4 | 102.3 | 10.0 | $30.9 | $5.0 |
| 2005 | Mariners | -6.9 | 8.0 | 21.7 | 2.3 | 25.0 | 2.5 | $8.5 | $11.4 |
| 2006 | Mariners | 7.0 | 17.2 | 22.7 | 2.3 | 49.2 | 4.7 | $17.5 | $12.9 |
| 2007 | Mariners | 10.9 | -3.9 | 21.3 | 2.1 | 30.3 | 3.0 | $12.1 | $12.9 |
| 2008 | Mariners | 6.6 | 13.4 | 20.4 | 1.6 | 42.0 | 4.2 | $18.8 | $13.4 |
(Table stolen from Fangraphs...hopefully ok?)
As always, honesty and intelligence is appreciated.
0 recs |
66 comments
Email
Print
Comments
I see 4.5-5.0 wins as the most likely case.
As a 4.2 win player last year, I can see Beltre getting enough extra value from his bat to get close to 5 wins, even factoring some defensive slippage.
by abender20 on Apr 7, 2009 10:38 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
And factor his not having the shittiest luck ever into it
by seattlebruin on Apr 7, 2009 10:44 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's what I mean with the regression from his bat.
He isn’t going to be a better hitter per se, just a less unlucky one. Call it 5.5 wins, but who knows. Last night he had two unfortunate outs on balls he ripped. Maybe the guy just can’t avoid fielders. I obviously don’t believe that, but I also don’t see him suddenly missing every fielder possible and putting up like 8 WAR
by abender20 on Apr 7, 2009 10:55 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I put him at 4.5-5 as well
figuring that his defensive value should remain ~stagnant, given that he was playing last year with a busted thumb on his glove hand essentially the entire season, and he’s still only 29, so no reason to expect serious decline yet.
Couple that with him being a 4.2 win player last year and being horrifically unlucky at bat, and 4.5-5 wins seems completely reasonable. I can’t believe people think he’s a bust – he needs to just be ~2 WAR this season to justify the overall contract, with significant room for improvement. I guess people just remember the 2004-2005 dropoff and think “oh hey, shit, Adrian Beltre sucks”
by seattlebruin on Apr 7, 2009 10:58 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's a good example of anchoring, unfortunately based off of an ignorant set of initial evaluations.
As soon as he didn’t repeat his 10 WAR performance (although it was the power and RBI display that people latched onto), impressions were set and that’s that.
I kind of like that, being the jackass that I am, because I enjoy knowing something about Beltre that most people don’t. I just wish it didn’t muddle the ability to get full value for him in a trade.
by abender20 on Apr 7, 2009 11:06 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't really care that I appreciate Beltre more than the average fan
I want the average fan to realize that
- baseball players have career years – Beltre’s just happened come at a very young age. You can’t expect a guy to repeat that every season
- defense is really important and Beltre is awesome at it
- thus, when you combine slightly above average offense with awesome defense at a tough position, you have a really, really valuable player
by seattlebruin on Apr 7, 2009 11:14 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
My dad has no use for sabermetrics, but he loves Beltre
My dad knows nothing of fielding stats, and I have to remind him what slugging % is. But he watches way more Mariner games than I do, so he sees Beltre on a regular basis. And he absolutely raves about Beltre’s hitting and fielding alike. He says that Beltre is the most magnificent infielder he’s ever seen, and my dad always says “and he makes it look so easy.” So I get the sense that average fans appreciate Beltre more than we at LL often realize. The commenters and commenters on places like ESPN.com who sign the praises of traditional stats and call Beltre a bust aren’t as representative of the average fan as they seem to think.
by Decatur on Apr 7, 2009 11:31 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
My dad is the same way
but he doesn’t quite put the same value on defense we do, and for $13M a season, he would be a bust were he a merely average defensive player
by seattlebruin on Apr 7, 2009 11:52 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
We're spoiled rotten as Seattle fans.
You know, aside from Seattle sports teams constantly tearing out our insides and playing Keep Away with the more sturdy bits of viscera.
To have USSM and LL (and Field Gulls), what have to be two of the absolute best team-specific baseball blogs around. If it weren’t for Fangraphs, which really is a partial extension of USSM and LL anyway, maybe the best available period.
The point is, we are not average fans. Most people are only privy to what they get from Sportscenter, BBTN, and the papers. As great as it would be for everyone to get all three of those points, it isn’t going to happen any time soon.This doesn’t change the fact that Beltre is in fact awesome, it’s just too bad that not everyone knows it.
by abender20 on Apr 7, 2009 11:32 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Just because a person lives in Seattle doesn;t mean they use the advanced analysis resources available to them
I’d bet only a tiny sliver regularly read Lookout Landing, and that only a small (but not insignificant) fraction read USSM religiously as well. Just because you have the tools available doesn’t mean they’ll get used – yeah, I’d bet that a higher portion of Mariners fans are well educated on advanced analysis than most other teams, but the average M’s fan is still probably an average baseball fan who gets most of their information from SportsCenter and BBTN.
As an aside, Baseball Tonight is UNGODLY awful. If I didn’t enjoy just watching baseball highlights all condensed into one nice little package, I would turn the channel as soon as it came on. John Kruk is awful and Steve Phillips is somehow significantly worse at analysis than Joe Morgan (go figure)
by seattlebruin on Apr 7, 2009 12:01 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I am new to LL and USSM, but I'm telling everyone I know* to check it out
- Everyone I know with good baseball smarts that is.. I wouldn’t want to ruin a good thing here
by d0nkey on Apr 7, 2009 12:07 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh I wasn't suggesting that all of Seattle SHOULD read USSM/LL,
just that we (LLians) are spoiled and as a result we see the world through WAR-colored glasses.
Also, in response to your aside, I gather that Morgan escapes being as bad as Phillips from the analysis side mainly because he offers very little up (that was most of the point of JoeChats afterall). Phillips feels the need to assert his dominance as a brilliant mind, and so he lets out mighty whimpers quite frequently. Joe just strings together words that make me wish I was on drugs.
by abender20 on Apr 7, 2009 12:10 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm just saying that Seattle has just as many typical fans as any other city, we just happen to have fantastic resources available to us should we choose to use them
on the subject of whether people should read LL/USSM, I’m actually of the opinion that LL/USSM should be required reading for any reasonably serious baseball fan. Not religiously, but my argument is that even if you prefer to enjoy baseball from the more visceral, call-it-as-you-see it viewpoint, it never hurts to understand another POV for analysis, in this case, advanced statistical analysis. It just makes no sense to me to completely overlook any good work someone is doing just because you don’t agree with it.
Perhaps it’s just me, because I’m an engineer by trade (and thus trained to have a critical eye towards everything), but in my fandom, I want to be able to see from ALL the viewpoints – I want to understand advanced analysis, I want to understand how scouting works, and I want to understand the game on the most basic “hey look at how hard that guy plays, I like his attitude” level.
Because it’s so precise, advanced analysis really appeals to me – however, I think I would really be missing out to not understand the way that other people enjoy the game.
by seattlebruin on Apr 7, 2009 12:22 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, I think most people are not you
and I don’t mean that in a bad way, it’s just that a large majority of sports fans are happy to see sports from one viewpoint. That’s neither a positive nor a negative, it’s just the way it is.
Nice Guys Finish Third - Hopelessly lost, but makin' good time.
by pdb on Apr 7, 2009 12:28 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I should hope most people are not me
I’d be really weirded out if they were
by seattlebruin on Apr 7, 2009 12:32 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I was one of the people that you are referring to
I used to think ERA and RBIs were important. Reading up here and on USSM has opened a new perspective on the game for me. And I love it. Although, I’m not as sabrely inclined as the rest of you, I understand where you guy get the numbers from, and I understand what they mean.
It has changed how I look at the game.
by d0nkey on Apr 7, 2009 12:33 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
There is a difference between ignorance and lack of curiosity.
You clearly have the curiosity and have set about trying to learn as much as possible.
In the sports community, I would contend that there are the true statheads who want to advance the game (Tango et al.), the people willing to put lots of effort into understanding and applying the stats (most of LL), the people who are completely unaware that this stuff exists but would be open to it, and those who like baseball the way they like it and will continue to watch it like that. I have always felt that most fans tend toward the latter.
by abender20 on Apr 7, 2009 12:52 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Trust me, I wholeheartedly agree with you. As a fellow engineer, I prefer to view anything quantitatively when possible.
It’s more personality than anything, though. I have a friend who is a huge sports fan, but just refuses to read stuff like this because he isn’t a very curious person in that respect. He likes things the way he knows them. That part of the population will always ignore this sort of thing.
by abender20 on Apr 7, 2009 12:48 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You'd be surprised.
I run into people all the time asking me if I’m “THAT” Taylor H
"The dark secret of LL is that it only exists so I can one day moderate Graham" ---Robert
by Taylor H on Apr 7, 2009 11:52 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Is Beltre's 2004 season the biggest career year for anybody ever?
The difference between that year and his next best is 5.3 WAR. That has to be up there in terms of a career year.
by Edgar for Pres on Apr 7, 2009 10:52 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Paul Abbott.
I will smash your face into a jelly.
by Phildopip on Apr 7, 2009 11:28 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
By the way.. LL is quiet today. Is everyone hung over?
by d0nkey on Apr 7, 2009 12:08 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
We had a 3,000+ comment outpouring yesterday.
by abender20 on Apr 7, 2009 12:12 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
LL is always quiet around lunchtime
most of us work 9-5s, myself included.
I just happen to have internet access and a private cube at my office
by seattlebruin on Apr 7, 2009 12:15 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Stupid everyone working 9 -5's and me working 4p - 12a
I always miss the good stuff..
by seattlesundevil on Apr 7, 2009 12:43 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe you should cover a less shitty team and you could work regular hours
sorry Mrs. PDB if you’re reading this, I’m only kidding
by seattlebruin on Apr 7, 2009 12:47 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Guh.. you're tellin me!
Although, I did luck out today.. Don’t have to deal with the Sean Miller hoopla!
by seattlesundevil on Apr 7, 2009 12:52 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hoopla is a curious word for a third choice that initially turned down the job
I’m curious – is Tucson excited about this guy?
Nice Guys Finish Third - Hopelessly lost, but makin' good time.
by pdb on Apr 7, 2009 12:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's got to be better than Russ Pennell.
by abender20 on Apr 7, 2009 12:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm not so sure about that
Pennell took a team that everyone expected to finish in the bottom half of the Pac-10 to the Sweet 16. That ain’t half bad.
Nice Guys Finish Third - Hopelessly lost, but makin' good time.
by pdb on Apr 7, 2009 12:54 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
He also got one of the easiest draws a 12-seed has ever seen
and his team certainly wasn’t lacking for talent, and did in fact finish in the bottom half of the league
by seattlebruin on Apr 7, 2009 12:55 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Also, he has two potential lottery picks and a capable point in Nic Wise.
by abender20 on Apr 7, 2009 12:56 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Late!
and his team certainly wasn’t lacking for talent
by seattlebruin on Apr 7, 2009 12:58 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Confession: I don't read anything you write.
by abender20 on Apr 7, 2009 1:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I was in no way prepared for a comeuppance of this magnitude.
I am bewildered and depressed.
by abender20 on Apr 7, 2009 1:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
His team wasn't lacking for talent but was severely lacking in cohesiveness and motivation
I’m not sure that he should have been given the job full time, but I don’t think he was that bad as a coach.
Nice Guys Finish Third - Hopelessly lost, but makin' good time.
by pdb on Apr 7, 2009 12:58 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I bet.
Nice Guys Finish Third - Hopelessly lost, but makin' good time.
by pdb on Apr 7, 2009 12:54 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
To clarify
I don’t think Sean Miller is a bad coach. In fact, I think he’s a very good coach. However, whenever I see a guy take over a marquee program, I think they need to be proven recruiters in order to be successful, and Sean Miller just wasn’t a great recruiter at Xavier. He was consistently in the middle-upper third of a decent league (the A-10), but was never seen as a guy who could go out and attract elite talent, even when Xavier was very, very good.
Tim Floyd scared me a lot more because he’s recruited incredibly well at usc (we’ll see how many violations come out of it, but the results speak for themselves), and is a proven great game coach. Miller is only one of the above.
Sean Miller very well could be the guy to lead Arizona back to glory – it’s just I think Tim Floyd at Arizona would have been a mortal lock
by seattlebruin on Apr 7, 2009 12:58 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm leery about Miller to be honest
for most of the reasons you listed. I just don’t see him as being that sort of marquee name that a program like Arizona wanted – I have no doubt he’s a capable coach, but I hope he’s not going to be a small fish in a really big pond.
Nice Guys Finish Third - Hopelessly lost, but makin' good time.
by pdb on Apr 7, 2009 1:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
by "be successful," I mean "be successful at a level which is appropriate to the history of the program"
not just be decently good
by seattlebruin on Apr 7, 2009 1:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
This is my fear
Nice Guys Finish Third - Hopelessly lost, but makin' good time.
by pdb on Apr 7, 2009 1:01 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
she's off-site at work today and not in front of a computer
so she’s probably not reading this. YOU DODGED A BULLET THERE GOOD SIR
or something.
Nice Guys Finish Third - Hopelessly lost, but makin' good time.
by pdb on Apr 7, 2009 12:54 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Mrs. pdb reads LL?
Ruh-rohs.
I will smash your face into a jelly.
by Phildopip on Apr 7, 2009 12:55 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not on a regular basis
but she has been known to lurk every now and again. But she’s even harder to offend than me.
Nice Guys Finish Third - Hopelessly lost, but makin' good time.
by pdb on Apr 7, 2009 12:56 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I can't type through this sad veil of tears
Nice Guys Finish Third - Hopelessly lost, but makin' good time.
by pdb on Apr 7, 2009 12:58 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think bender's feeling rapey.
I will smash your face into a jelly.
by Phildopip on Apr 7, 2009 1:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Should I draft Beltre or Zimmerman in my fantasy league?
I am trying this wacky stuff for the first time. It’s fun, but so frustrating. I keep thinking that if only the scoring were based on WAR instead of hits, homers, rbi, holds, saves, wins etc I would probably be a shoe-in.
by mattybobo on Apr 7, 2009 12:37 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
nobody cares about your fantasy team
Less snarky translation: We don’t really talk about fantasy baseball in the site during the season. You will be mercilessly mocked if you do.
Once a year Jeff puts up a Fantasy BB thread where you can talk about it to your heart’s content. Here’s this year’s.
Nice Guys Finish Third - Hopelessly lost, but makin' good time.
by pdb on Apr 7, 2009 12:39 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
