Master Index of Archived Threads


Jose Reyes Deathwatch

Bret Sabermetric Apr 25 2006 05:12 AM

Okay, we're 19 games into the season, and Jose's been on base in the leadoff spot at a blazing .276 clip, despite which the Mets are playing pretty good ball. If their w-l record were reversed at this point, I think some would be calling for Jose's head, but it's not, so he's okay for now. That fabled lifetime .311 OBP at season's end, however, is starting to look like a lofty ambition for Jose, and it raises the question of the Mets' long-range plans for young Mr. Reyes. How long do you keep him in the leadoff spot with no further signs of improved OBP? A month? The whole season? As long as he's under contract? The larger question is what do you do with signing Jose to a LT contract?(LT being any contract longer than a one-year deal, the advantage to which is that you're locking him up for longer than absolutely necessary, and so committing the Mets to Jose and preventing them from finding another ss/leadoff hitter, but gaining the benefits of his services for longer, too.) The Mets' general policy has been to play the ostrich here. Do nothing, until Jose injures himself, at which point they try some other option at ss and leadoff. But if you're more pro-active, when do you start thinking that Jose's not cutting it at leadoff and send him to the bottom of the order until his OBP improves? The answer to that naturally affects your long-range planning as well. No way am I offering a .276 OBP guy with a decent glove at short a whole lot of financial security. I can pick guys like that off trees. The only reason to think of Jose as valuable at this point is in his potential, but potential is not a word I feel comfortable with for years and years and years. After a while I want some results. When is "after a while"?

Johnny Dickshot Apr 25 2006 05:13 AM

How possible do ya think it is that he was rushed to the majors?

Bret Sabermetric Apr 25 2006 05:17 AM

I don't buy "being rushed to the majors" as a cause of inability, unless the guy was rushed to the majors and then sat on the bench. Games are games, and I think Jose demonstrated clearly that he was the best ss in their system when he was called up (if not before). It's retarded to think that Jose was retarded in his advancement by being handed a starting ss's job in MLB when he was.

Johnny Dickshot Apr 25 2006 05:32 AM

Just bustin chops. I try not to panic over any regular with fewer than 100 PAs and since Reyes gets more of 'em, 150. I forget the precise number, but it's been shown that any batter can bat anything in 70 at-bats. Contract Schmontract. Wait n see

Bret Sabermetric Apr 25 2006 05:38 AM

Bringing up players young purely benefits them, as it exposes them to a more challenging level of competition. The only reason to leave someone at a lower level is that he wouldn't be able to compete at the higher one. If you're letting him feed off lesser pitching than he can handle, thenh you're slowing his advancement. That's from the player's point of view. The club has a motivation in keeping players down on the farm: to delay their FA days as long as possible. If you think some 19 year old has the potential to hit 35 HRs in his late 20s, you don't want him at the MLB level for ages 20-25, when you could lose him. But that's not what we're discussing in Jose's case, is it? If we had any real signs of OBP potential here, we'd just want him signed to a LT contract in a year or two. But the closer we approach that point, the more likely any sign could be a small sample size deception. For example, say Jose puts in another lousy OBP year in 2006 and also for the first half of 2007, then puts in a pretty good OBP in August and September of 2007. You could sign him to a LT contract at that point, but there's a serious risk that the two month OBP is the aberration. If he starts performing NOW, though and keeps it up for the next two years, you're probably pretty confident in offering that LT contract.

smg58 Apr 25 2006 07:19 AM

Reyes has five walks in 82 AB's, which while still not good is actually an improvement for him. Right now the bigger problem is hits, which should come eventually. I'm still not sure what Reyes' long-term value is, but there's no reason to answer that question today. And since he's still a few years from free agency, I don't see any need to sign him right now to anything.

sharpie Apr 25 2006 07:23 AM

I seem to remember him going into a wicked slump at some point last year - also hitting the ball into the air too often. Those 5 walks are 5 more than he had at a comparable time last season. I agree with smg, the hits will come.

Rotblatt Apr 25 2006 07:38 AM

Bret Sabermetric wrote: Bringing up players young purely benefits them, as it exposes them to a more challenging level of competition. The only reason to leave someone at a lower level is that he wouldn't be able to compete at the higher one. If you're letting him feed off lesser pitching than he can handle, thenh you're slowing his advancement. Totally! People learn fastest when facing the best of the best of the best. It's why when I decide to learn tennis, I'm going to challenge Aggassi mano y mano over and over again until I'm kicking his ass up and down the court. It's why when I was a child, I skipped "Clifford the Big Red Dog" and went straight to "Ulysses." A sound educational method that's woefully underpracticed. Seriously, we should just bring our best prospects directly from high school (Not college, though. If they've wasted two to four years facing mediocrity in college, then they're already stunted developmentally) into the majors. That would pretty much guarantee the fastest rate of learning for them.

Benjamin Grimm Apr 25 2006 07:41 AM

You kinda ignored Bret's second paragraph there, Rotblatt.

Rotblatt Apr 25 2006 07:45 AM

Yancy Street Gang wrote: You kinda ignored Bret's second paragraph there, Rotblatt. Oh, no I didn't. Jose put up mediocre numbers at best in the minors, a fact which Bret conveniently ignores every time I bring it up.

Rotblatt Apr 25 2006 07:49 AM

Minor league totals: .275 AVG/.338 OBP/.401 SLG/.739 OPS 2003 Norfolk (1st time at AAA): .269 AVG/.333 OBP/.356 SLG/.689 OPS Yep, he had nothing to learn from facing AAA pitchers, that's for sure.

Bret Sabermetric Apr 25 2006 07:51 AM

smg58 wrote: And since he's still a few years from free agency, I don't see any need to sign him right now to anything. I'm not saying the Mets should. What I am saying is that IF you see a big OBP improvement this year, that (coupled with sustained growth next year) lets you sign him to a LT term at the end of 2007 with some reasonable confidence that you're doing the right thing, you're okay. But every day between now and the end of 2007 that you don't get that big boost in OBP means that you're working with a smaller and smaller sample size, which is increasingly susceptible to error. It's fine to say "We don't need to sign him for another two seasons," but you need to look at your dwindling basis for signing him at all after 2007. You don't want to be desperately optimistic in committing major resources to someone whose chances of stardom are slim and none.

Benjamin Grimm Apr 25 2006 08:00 AM

Reyes won't be eligible for free agency until after 2009. They really don't have to give much thought to a long-term contract for him for a while yet. After 2007 would be the earliest, I think, and that's only if he's a top player at that point. Otherwise, wait until after 2008. If he's mediocre at that point, you can accept the risk of losing him, especially if there's a viable replacement in the pipeline. For now, just let him play, and let him try to improve his game. There's no point right now worrying about whether he'll be signed for 2012 or beyond.

Bret Sabermetric Apr 25 2006 08:02 AM

Rotblatt wrote: Minor league totals: .275 AVG/.338 OBP/.401 SLG/.739 OPS 2003 Norfolk (1st time at AAA): .269 AVG/.333 OBP/.356 SLG/.689 OPS Yep, he had nothing to learn from facing AAA pitchers, that's for sure. I don't get what you're saying at all, Rot. He hit AAA pitching okay, and obviously has played well enough in MLB to keep his job. If he had a .600 OPS up here, then sure, send him back. But how do you think Jose's numbers in the majors compare to other 20-year-olds and 21-year olds? They're pretty good. He's a major league level talent for longer than he's been an MLB player. He just isn't improving quickly enough to hang on to a leadoff batter's job. if you were right, he would have flunked out of the big leagues long ago.

Bret Sabermetric Apr 25 2006 08:09 AM

Yancy Street Gang wrote: For now, just let him play, and let him try to improve his game. There's no point right now worrying about whether he'll be signed for 2012 or beyond. Well, yeah, there's not a lot of options right now, are there? But you need to see some growth at some point, and his fourth MLB season is not too soon. And I'm not talking about growth just to the .311 OBP level, though even that would be nice to see. right now it will take a sustained hot streak just to get him up to MLB average (for all hitters) in OBP, at which point a sustained cool streak might be expected. He's digging himself into a deeper hole with every at bat. Rotty, what do you suppose is the kind of instruction available at AAA that Jose can't get in the majors? You seem to misunderstand the relationship between AAA and MLB numbers. They're often better at the MLB levels, if the leagues and home parks aren't comparable. All you're looking to see is whether the player can perform adequately at any given level. Once that's established there's no reason for the player to stay at that level, none whatsoever.

abogdan Apr 25 2006 08:23 AM

I couldn't agree less. Jose Reyes has not shown that he is a major league ready hitter. He's had over 1300 career PA and put up a career OPS of .694. He has not come close to a major league acceptable OBP since his initial half season in the majors. He's an incredible base runner, but a terrible hitter. I would suppose there is a lot of instruction available in the minors that isn't available in the major leagues, and maybe more importantly, more opportunities for a player to work on the things he is being taught in a game situation. For one, I would imagine that hitters would be more willing to try new approaches at the plate in game situations more readily at the minor league level than at the major league level. If Norfolk is losing games while Jose Reyes is getting 700 PA appearances a season while he struggles to recognize pitches and regularly hit the top half of the ball, no one will really care. On a team expected to contend for a playoff spot, like the Mets, I could see how management and Reyes would be more reluctant to have him completely revamp his approach to hitting. It's unrealistic to think, however, that the Mets are going to send Reyes down to Norfolk unless he's there on a rehab assignment. He should be moved to the bottom of the lineup, where his low OBP will do the least amount of damage.

86-Dreamer Apr 25 2006 08:27 AM

There is plenty of time before they have to decide upon a contract. What I am most concerned about is the number of outs he is making in the leadoff spot. If he can't post an OBP of .315 or better over his next 100 PAs, I fully support a demotion to the 8th spot.

Bret Sabermetric Apr 25 2006 08:31 AM

abogdan wrote: I couldn't agree less. Jose Reyes has not shown that he is a major league ready hitter. He's had over 1300 career PA and put up a career OPS of .694. He has not come close to a major league acceptable OBP since his initial half season in the majors. He's an incredible base runner, but a terrible hitter. I would suppose there is a lot of instruction available in the minors that isn't available in the major leagues, and maybe more importantly, more opportunities for a player to work on the things he is being taught in a game situation. For one, I would imagine that hitters would be more willing to try new approaches at the plate in game situations more readily at the minor league level than at the major league level. If Norfolk is losing games while Jose Reyes is getting 700 PA appearances a season while he struggles to recognize pitches and regularly hit the top half of the ball, no one will really care. On a team expected to contend for a playoff spot, like the Mets, I could see how management and Reyes would be more reluctant to have him completely revamp his approach to hitting. It's unrealistic to think, however, that the Mets are going to send Reyes down to Norfolk unless he's there on a rehab assignment. He should be moved to the bottom of the lineup, where his low OBP will do the least amount of damage. If you've got a wholly inadequate player leading off 162 games a year, I would contend that you're nowhere near being a contending club. And in that case, why not hold MLB tryout camp all season long? The Mets don't have a clue what they are. They're squandering at bats and starts on players like Reyes and Zambrano and Matsui and Hernandez and Bannister, hoping to see some star quality without a lot of basis for that hope, at least in the short term. But in the short term they're gearing up for serious battle with people like Pedro and Glavine and Cliff Floyd, whom they don't expect to be around when the maybe-babies' development pays off in three or four more seasons. What this philosophy means, IMO, is to throw out on the field whatever grab-bag of players you've haphazardly assembled, and hope for lightning to strike. Meanwhile, the rubes will continue to believe in this hapless bunch of goofballs, as long as you keep spinning it correctly.

Centerfield Apr 25 2006 08:36 AM

What I don't understand about Jose Reyes is how anyone allowed that swing to climb up through the system. He steps in the bucket, gets out on his front foot, and the back foot, instead of staying planted and rotating, slides all over the place. He has a horrible swing. Can we really expect improvement from him as long as he has these mechanics? As to Bret's questions, I'm with Yancy about pushing off any thought of a long term deal until the end of 2007. Let's see where he is then. As far as his OBP this year, give him until the All-Star break. If he hasn't straightened himself out by them, move him down in the lineup and hope there's someone worthy of being moved up.

Rotblatt Apr 25 2006 11:00 AM

Bret Sabermetric wrote: I don't get what you're saying at all, Rot. He hit AAA pitching okay, and obviously has played well enough in MLB to keep his job. If he had a .600 OPS up here, then sure, send him back. But how do you think Jose's numbers in the majors compare to other 20-year-olds and 21-year olds? They're pretty good. He's a major league level talent for longer than he's been an MLB player. He just isn't improving quickly enough to hang on to a leadoff batter's job. if you were right, he would have flunked out of the big leagues long ago. I'm saying that Reyes DIDN'T hit AAA pitching okay. For me, I'd like to see exteremly young guys clobber AAA (or AA--I've got no problem promoting people from AA if their numbers are good enough) pitching for about 200 at bats before bringing them up. Wright's how I'd prefer to see it done. In the AFL in 2004, he was on fire after a decent 2003 campaign in A+. Based on the AFL & a hot spring training, we sent him to AA, where he put up a 1.086 OPS in over 200 AB. We promoted him to AAA, where he posted a .967 OPS in over 100 AB. We'd seen enough and called him up. Clearly a good call in retrospect, and I'd argue it was the right call at the time as well. Reyes, on the other hand, kept getting promoted because of his upside, not his results. Now that he's here, he's under pressure to produce, which means he can't spend two months rebuilding his swing or overhauling his approach at the plate. Sure, I think he'll be able to hack it out and put up average numbers for a short stop, but it just seems like his upside is so much higher. Of course, it's impossible to say what might have been, but you have to wonder if he would've been able to take that next step had he stayed in the minors . . . Now, maybe he can take that next step anyway while in the majors, and maybe you're right and bringing him up didn't hurt him at all (aside from the whole 2B debacle). Honestly, think his approach at the plate is better this year, and I think he'll be alright in the long term, but his performance in the bigs since 2003 hasn't given us much reason for hope. Out of curiosity, I looked at Reyes' PECOTA comps. There are no good matches (meaning similarity scores above 50), but Gary Templeton is the highest (45), followed by Aparicio (35), Larkin (32) and Guzman (28). Of those, Larkin's the only good offensive player, although Templeton had a few good seasons, and Guzman had a nice 2001. All were called up young, and all had long careers (well, Guzman's is in question there). Still, not very inspiring, at least from an offensive standpoint. Anyway, to get back to your main question, drop him down to eighth now. If he gets going, move him back up. If he doesn't, send him to AAA until he does get going. That's what I'd like to see.

Bret Sabermetric Apr 25 2006 11:14 AM

Rotblatt wrote: [ Now that he's here, he's under pressure to produce, which means he can't spend two months rebuilding his swing or overhauling his approach at the plate.. This is the part I don't get. Do the Mets have a better option at ss now? No, no one even close. But they've constructed such a screwed up roster, of used-to-be-greats very expensively playing a WIN RIGHT THIS SECOND game, alongside guys who need to improve over the next few years to be competitive. Only Beltran, Wright and Delgado are in the primes right now, and 3 guys on your squad in their primes isn't going to make the playoffs very often. Unless they have an option at ss, they have to keep playing Reyes. It's more about putting up the appearance of a playoff team than actually developing Reyes and their other young players. If they decided that Reyes should try batting by holding onto the thick end of the bat, it wouldn't work, not because it's an inherently stupid idea but because it looks like hell to be experimenting and teaching and trying things when we've got a pennant to win here.

KC Apr 25 2006 11:21 AM

Let us know when you find baseball nirvana ... leave a peanuts and cracker jack trail.

Rotblatt Apr 25 2006 11:47 AM

Bret Sabermetric wrote: Unless they have an option at ss, they have to keep playing Reyes. It's more about putting up the appearance of a playoff team than actually developing Reyes and their other young players. If they decided that Reyes should try batting by holding onto the thick end of the bat, it wouldn't work, not because it's an inherently stupid idea but because it looks like hell to be experimenting and teaching and trying things when we've got a pennant to win here. I agree that we can't really send him down unless the bottom truely drops out, and that any experimenting on Reyes will be limited to minor tinkering. Again, though, I think Reyes will put up average SS offensive numbers, with above average SB numbers. In other words, I don't think he'll be a detriment to the club. I'm just getting increasingly doubtful that he'll be the Jose Reyes we all envisioned in 2002. I disagree about the whole "appearance of a playoff team" thing--I think they built this team in 2006 to make the playoffs--but I'm sure that comes as no suprise to you . . .

Bret Sabermetric Apr 25 2006 12:15 PM

Rotblatt wrote: any experimenting on Reyes will be limited to minor tinkering. . . . Examine the reasoning here, please. If Reyes needs major tweaking, why wouldn't he get it? Because of the message that major tweaking sends--we're not competitive this year. But if he needs major tweaking, he needs it. Packaging that message, spinning it, massaging the image, really doesn't change the truth, does it? I'd much rather they kept Reyes, but if they want to win the 2006 pennant they need to swap him out for a WIN NOW ss, and fix up some other major weaknesses on this ballclub. There are usually 10-14 clubs that have no chance to play post-season ball, and 10-14 that have a decent chance (come mid-season). Very few clubs limp through the entire year, much less several years in a row, both rebuilding (with major projects in key positions) and going for the gusto (with major salaries in other key positions) simultaneously. The Mets manage to do this year after year, and have no problem saying that they're trying their hardest to do both at once. I don't know if that's a lie or cluelessness, but I do know that it's difficult to ride two horses with only one backside.

Rotblatt Apr 25 2006 12:17 PM

BP's Jim Baker weighs in: ]Jose Reyes' appointment with destiny All this talk of batting lines has gotten me to thinking about what Jose Reyes has been up to. Until he did not start Sunday night's game in San Diego, he was on a streak that saw him make at least three outs in 13 consecutive games. This is nothing like a record, but it shows that Reyes has not lost his out-making touch. Last year, he tied for the third-most outs in a single season: Top 10 Outmakers of the 20th & 21st Centuries 551: Omar Moreno, Pittsburgh (1980) 530: Horace Clarke, New York Yankees (1970) 529: Jose Reyes, New York Mets (2005) 529: Omar Moreno, Pittsburgh (1982) 529: Sandy Alomar, California (1971) 528: Omar Moreno, Pittsburgh (1979) 528: Sandy Alomar, California (1970) 526: Juan Samuel, Philadelphia (1984) 525: Alfredo Griffin, Toronto (1980) 521: Bobby Richardson, New York Yankees (1964) 521: Roger Metzger, Houston (1972) This season, Reyes has an outside shot of bettering them all, even the grand imperial high-exalted most excellent master himself: Omar Moreno. A number of things have to align just so for Reyes to make this happen. His manager,Willie Randolph, must continue to ignore all appeals to reason and bat him leadoff. He has to start every day and refrain from walking--something he hasn't had a problem with in the past. He himself has to maintain a batting average in the .240 range. The Mets need to score enough runs so that he's getting five at bats rather than four (or play a lot of extra inning games). Reyes is a high-percentage base stealer, something Moreno was not, so he's not going to generate many outs that way. At this moment, projecting from what Reyes has done in the first 19 games, he would make 554 outs in 2006, a new all-time record. (Yes, it's a small sample size, but it's one that does not run counter to past performance.) There really isn't a lot of play there, so it seems unlikely he'll achieve outmaking immortality in 2006. A more likely eventuality is that he betters last year's total but falls short of Moreno's grandeur. In other words: look out Horace Clarke!

Bret Sabermetric Apr 25 2006 12:20 PM

I love the nickname "Omar the Out-maker"--you all get the [url=http://lexicorient.com/e.o/khayyam.htm]literary reference[/url], of course?

old original jb Apr 25 2006 12:26 PM

Reyes shouldn't be anywhere BUT at the top of the lineup. Last year he was among the elite players in runs scored, despite his less than stellar OBP and a none-too potent middle of the Mets lineup following him. His OPS is nowhere near those of the players around him in the runs scored category. Of course, this is due to his speed. He gives the middle of the lineup the chance to drive him in because when he is on base, he gets into scoring position with regularity. At the top of the lineup, his batting weakness is less likely to strand runners than at the bottom of the lineup, so his reduced ability to drive in runs will have less negative impact. Of course, we'd all prefer that he walk more and get more hits, but my guess is that those accomplishments will come with time. In the meanwhile, I think his game is so different from that of other players that it should be judged by different metrics.

Hillbilly Apr 25 2006 12:31 PM

How do his ten most similar players look?

Rotblatt Apr 25 2006 12:42 PM

Hillbilly wrote: How do his ten most similar players look? 5. Alfredo Griffin (26) - career OPS+ of 67 6. Paul Molitor (24) - 122 OPS+ 7. Bert Campaneris (23) - 89 OPS+ 8. Johnny Damon (22) - 102 OPS+ 9. Sonny Jackson (20) - 73 OPS+ 10. Mariano Duncan (17) - 86 OPS+

Hillbilly Apr 25 2006 12:52 PM

Rotblatt wrote: ="Hillbilly"]How do his ten most similar players look? 5. Alfredo Griffin (26) - career OPS+ of 67 6. Paul Molitor (24) - 122 OPS+ 7. Bert Campaneris (23) - 89 OPS+ 8. Johnny Damon (22) - 102 OPS+ 9. Sonny Jackson (20) - 73 OPS+ 10. Mariano Duncan (17) - 86 OPS+ Thanks, Rotblatt. We need to remember that he's only 23.

Bret Sabermetric Apr 25 2006 01:30 PM

Rotblatt wrote: ="Hillbilly"]How do his ten most similar players look? 5. Alfredo Griffin (26) - career OPS+ of 67 6. Paul Molitor (24) - 122 OPS+ 7. Bert Campaneris (23) - 89 OPS+ 8. Johnny Damon (22) - 102 OPS+ 9. Sonny Jackson (20) - 73 OPS+ 10. Mariano Duncan (17) - 86 OPS+ Where is this list from? (And where are players 1-4?) Baseballreference.com lists 10 most similar batters I've never heard of. Mike Caruso (940) Sy Sutcliffe (938) Leo Norris (937) Bob Fisher (936) Alex Cintron (936) Andy Cohen (935) Benny McCoy (935) Orlando Miller (932) Ollie Beard (932) Lou Klein (930)

Hillbilly Apr 25 2006 01:49 PM

Similar Batters through Age 22 Compare Stats Jack Doyle (962) Mark Koenig (955) Red Kress (951) Jack O'Connor (948) Joe Cronin (947) * Joe Tinker (945) * Mike Caruso (944) Alfredo Griffin (943) Wil Cordero (943) Juan Uribe (942) But this list includes two hall-of-famers.

Bret Sabermetric Apr 25 2006 01:55 PM

Not saying Jose is going to be shitty, saying I don't want the Mets paying him big bucks to be shitty. That's a pretty shitty group though, two HOFers notwithstanding. Tinker's a pure glove guy, and a very marginal HOFer. Where is your first list from?

Hillbilly Apr 25 2006 01:57 PM

Right next to yours, about 2 inches to the right.

Rotblatt Apr 25 2006 02:07 PM Edited 2 time(s), most recently on Apr 25 2006 02:21 PM

Bret, It's from Baseball Prospectus' PECOTA forecasts. They call the comparisons "the backbone" of their forecasts. Here's their definition: ]For Hitters: PECOTA compares each hitter against a database of roughly 20,000 major league batter seasons since World War II. In addition, it also draws upon a database of roughly 10,000 translated minor league seasons (1998-2005) for hitters who spent most of their previous season in the minor leagues. (When minor league comparables are used, they appear in ALL CAPS). PECOTA considers four broad categories of attributes in determining a hitter's comparability: 1. Production metrics--in particular, batting average, isolated power, unintentional walk rate, strikeout rate, groundball:flyball ratio and a modified version of the Bill James speed score. 2. Usage metrics, including career length and plate appearances. 3. Phenotypic attributes, including handedness, height and weight. 4. Fielding Position. PECOTA doesn't require that a comparable hitter play the same defensive position; it is a factor that is evaluated along with many others, and assigned a relatively substantial weight. Consideration is also given to the 'similarity' between two positions; for example, a shortstop will be compared to a second baseman before he is compared to a left fielder. (See additional discussion). Here's 1-4: Gary Templeton (45) - 87 career OPS+ Aparicio (35) -- 82 career OPS+ Larkin (32) -- 116 career OPS+ Guzman (28) -- 73 career OPS+ Reyes at the moment has an 82 OPS+--certainly in line with his comps, all of whom got early starts as well. PECOTA doesn't really expect a breakthrough for Reyes, although this year, it does give him a 10% shot at an .869 OPS with an OBP of .373. On the bottom 10%, they have him at .598 OPS with an OBP of .275. The fact that there's such a wide spread indicates that PECOTA doesn't have a good handle on him and isn't sure what to expect. Here are Reyes' PECOTA projections in OPS/OBP through 2010. I'm taking these with big ole' grains of salt, since there aren't that many comparable players to Reyes (according to PECOTA anyway), and since forecasting at all is unreliable and this far out is just this side of ludicrous: 2006: .714/.317 2007: .730/.326 2008: .709/.320 2009: .737/.332 2010: .724/.322 Decent for a middle infielder. Not typically the kind of guy you'd want leading off though. I really do keep coming back to Christain Guzman in my head. He batted leadoff for the Twins for a while, and really had no business being there outside of 2001 (.337 OBP). Jose's a better basestealer than Christian, but they're both Dominican, fast, got early starts in the bigs, and came up with stellar defensive reputations. I can't remember if Guzman got the same hype Reyes did (I kind of doubt it), but when he was the bee's knees in Minnesota for a while. Fans loved him. Edits: first to add a little more info/disclaimers; second for typos. My Guzman comp is more what I fear rather than what I expect. Frankly, I expect him to do what PECOTA projects. Three years ago, though, I'd have expected him to be a combination of Rickey and Larkin.

Bret Sabermetric Apr 25 2006 02:08 PM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Apr 25 2006 02:41 PM

My point being that Jose belongs at the top of the order about as much as most of those bottom of the order guys do. Larkin was a .375 OBP guy not much past Jose's age, with less MLB experience than Jose. I don't even see how he got on this list. Maybe it's a list of guys whose OBPs improved? Aparicio was an atrocious leadoff hitter. This is not a promising list.

Nymr83 Apr 25 2006 02:23 PM

I agree that Reyes shouldn't be leading off, but i think talk of AAA is silly. I find it impossible to believe that after 3 years in the majors taking a step backwards will do anything to help him. With everybody healthy you might try: Nady, Beltran, Wright, Delgado, Floyd, LoDuca, Matsui, Reyes. If Matsui shows he can hit i'd lead HIM off (not that i find this at all likely.)

Johnny Dickshot Apr 25 2006 02:42 PM

Don't think the suggestion was made we send him down but whether or not he was recalled too early.

sharpie Apr 25 2006 03:57 PM

]Larkin was a .375 OBP guy not much past Jose's age, with less MLB experience than Jose Reyes will turn 23 this year. Larkin turned 23 in his second season where he had a .306 obp. His .375 came when he was 25.

Bret Sabermetric Apr 25 2006 06:45 PM

sharpie wrote: ]Larkin was a .375 OBP guy not much past Jose's age, with less MLB experience than Jose Reyes will turn 23 this year. Larkin turned 23 in his second season where he had a .306 obp. His .375 came when he was 25. Larkin had already put up a .320 OBP the previous season. I think his lifetime low was about .311 that he had at the end of that .306 year. My point was that we're divided as to whether Jose will be ablel to post a lifetime .311 OBP at the end of this year when he'll be the same as larkin (and the low point in Larkin's OBP). Right now, Jose stands at just about .300. And Larkin is clearly the best of Reyes' comparables. If he performs anything like Larkin, my whole argument here is totally wrong. But listen carefully: I'm not saying that can't happen. I'm not saying that I don't that to happen. What I'm saying is: it has to start happening very soon. In 1988 (the equivalent of Reyes' 2007) Larkin put up an OPS of .776. Jose put up an OPS last year .090 points below that. His current OPS is .042 below that. These are not encouraging signs.

Nymr83 Apr 25 2006 07:24 PM

one encouraging sign is that his OBP is 40 points higher than his batting average, if THAT keeps up you'd have to think he'll get over .310 since he can probably hit .270

Elster88 Apr 27 2006 10:58 PM

Jose Reyes BB: 7 Jose Reyes BB in 2005: 27 Jose Reyes BB projected in 2006: 54 (for some reason my calculator is returning 54 exactly) Jose Reyes OBP: .296 Gotta get some hits to go with the walks. Then he can get 108 walks in 2007.

Edgy DC Apr 28 2006 05:41 AM

Yeah, it's important to note that it's hits that he's missing right now. We've got to be ready for a falloff there (hopefully brief) as a few more walks come. If the hits come back without the walks dropping off, he'll have made a big adjustment.

sharpie May 01 2006 06:54 AM

OBP is now .330.

Elster88 May 01 2006 07:32 AM

12 BB projects to 81

Edgy DC May 01 2006 07:42 AM

This is pretty bitchin' news so far. Yeah, his hitting has tailed off, but you'd expect to lose something there from a slap hitter working on restraining his swing instinct. Obviously, he hasn't lost as many hits as he's gained walks, so it's probably a net gain developmentally, if not productively, and that may not be too far off.

Rotblatt May 01 2006 07:45 AM

Looking increasingly comfortable at the plate. His walk total was definitely helped by yesterday's miniscule strike zone, but he let some nasty pitches that he might have swung at in the past go by. Two thumbs up from Rotblatt for Reyes's early going. Reyes & Milledge's batting eyes seem to improving dramatically this season. I wonder if it's an institutional change, if it's unrelated, or what. If it's sustainable for both of them, it will, regardless of HOW, represent a huge organizational acheivement.

smg58 May 01 2006 08:21 AM

I'm not sure it's an institutional change, as we're 25th in team walks, with only Pittsburgh doing worse in the NL. Still, Reyes leaves April on pace for 81 walks... how could that not be a good sign?

Frayed Knot May 01 2006 08:29 AM

I agree that assuming some sort of fundamental organizational change has been decreed & implemented and is now showing results is a huge leap of faith. More likely it's a small sample size based on only two chosen (albeit important) players.

Hillbilly May 01 2006 08:40 AM

Jose is tied for the team lead in walks: [url]http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/Statistics/Team/playerstats?team=nym[/url]

Elster88 May 01 2006 08:44 AM

[url]http://cybermessageboard.ehost.com/getalife/viewtopic.php?t=2748&start=40[/url]

Hillbilly May 01 2006 09:11 AM

We agree.

Elster88 May 01 2006 09:12 AM

It's a beautiful thing. Worthy of being posted in multiple threads.

Edgy DC May 01 2006 09:14 AM

]I agree that assuming some sort of fundamental organizational change has been decreed & implemented and is now showing results is a huge leap of faith. More likely it's a small sample size based on only two chosen (albeit important) players. It's not out of the question, though, that the common thread is that these are the two guys who perhaps got the most (or most effective) instruction from Rickey Henderson, or responded best to it. That's far from a safe assumption, of course, but it's intriguing.

Johnny Dickshot May 01 2006 09:17 AM

Nor for nothing, but while Reyes is up there in walks is encouraging, it'd be nice to see from pressure from such Mets as Nady, Wright and LoDuca. Maybe it is close. I think you know what I mean.

Rotblatt May 01 2006 09:19 AM

Frayed Knot wrote: I agree that assuming some sort of fundamental organizational change has been decreed & implemented and is now showing results is a huge leap of faith. More likely it's a small sample size based on only two chosen (albeit important) players. Well, sure, but if you listen to the experts, they'll tell you that the number of people who have developed a good eye at the plate are few and far between, and most seem to be guys who developed power then began to get a bit pitched around (or maybe their eye improved first--hard to say). We've got two at once who show signs that they MIGHT be turning a corner, which seems a little unusual to me. But maybe not . . . Anyway, the most Reyes walks has ever had in a month is 10 in 120 PA in August 2003 (8% of all PA). Reyes ends April at 12 in 112 PA (11%). Now, maybe he'll go back to being his old self (4% for his MLB career) starting today, but it's definitely an encouraging sign, as smg says. Milledge, meanwhile, has a 18 walks in just 102 PA (18%). In 207 AAA PA last year, Milledge walked only 14 times (7%)--just below his career minor league average of 8%. To put it another way, Milledge's 18 walks so far this season account for 23% of the total number of walks he's drawn in all 917 plate appearances of his professional career. If he stays at the same rate and receives 458 plate appearances (as he did last year), he will have more than doubled his career walk total. Amazing. My suspicion is that, IF he keeps it up, it will have been an extremely uncommon jump forward. I could be wrong, though . . .

Edgy DC May 01 2006 09:25 AM

Milledge, for what's it's worth, has been head and shoulders ahead of his fellow Tides as a hitter this year, so he's prone to being pitched around. Reyes is somebody they want to keep off the bases at all costs.

Rotblatt May 01 2006 09:32 AM

="Edgy DC"]Milledge, for what's it's worth, has been head and shoulders ahead of his fellow Tides as a hitter this year, so he's prone to being pitched around. Reyes is somebody they want to keep off the bases at all costs. That's true, but Milledge has also been batting leadoff and he's got great speed. I have a hard time believing they're actually pitching around him . . .

Hillbilly May 02 2006 01:24 PM

[url]http://www.nysun.com/article/31961?page_no=2&access=722635[/url] The NY Sun would call it a well panned 'star watch' as oppossed to a death watch. I found this on Metsblog.com

Elster88 May 02 2006 01:27 PM

]The NY Sun would call it a well panned 'star watch' as oppossed to a death watch Thread/article titles can be a reflection of the general attitude and personality of the writer.

Elster88 May 11 2006 07:53 AM

Jose Reyes BB 2005: 27 Jose Reyes BB 2006: 14 Jose Reyes BB 2006 projected: 68.7272727272727273 Jose Reyes OBP 2005: .300 Jose Reyes OBP 2006: .330 Jose Reyes OPS 2005: .686 Jose Reyes OPS 2006: .756

smg58 May 11 2006 08:03 AM

I'd very happily take .330 and .756 from him over a full season.

duan May 11 2006 08:03 AM

if Reyes could just get the OBP up to .350 he'd start to become REALLY valuable. I think we have to look on his development so far this year as extremely encouraging. The OBP being at .330 with a .267 average is really encouraging - as is the fact that he's showing a little more power too.

Elster88 May 11 2006 08:04 AM

smg58 wrote: I'd very happily take .330 and .756 from him over a full season. Really? Not batting leadoff though, right? Or do you just mean you'll take it for this year and hope for further improvement? I'm looking at it that way.

sharpie May 11 2006 08:32 AM

On April 25, when this thread started, Jose had a .233BA, .275OBP, .360SLG, .635OPS Today: .267BA, .331OBP, .425SLG, .756OPS Clearly, Jose is reading this board and responded accordingly (which also makes me think that his English is better than he lets on).

Edgy DC May 11 2006 09:33 AM

I think his English is fine. His accent is pretty think but the comprehension and construction is there.

metirish May 11 2006 09:35 AM

They should just make reyes bat righty, he's clearly a better hitter from that side.

Frayed Knot May 11 2006 09:39 AM

On a Reyes side-note: Willie - on his weekly radio interview yesterday - said that he was pretty sure Reyes was safe at 2nd the other night but didn't go out and argue because he was too mad at Jose getting caught on the fake-to-3rd play ... especially since the coach had just warned him about it the pitch before. 'Tryin to teach a lesson there' - or something along those lines. I kinda like that. It wouldn't have changed the call, of course, and Willie's kind of a wimpy arguer anyway, but it says to him that; 'I'll have your back but you've got to do enough to earn that right'.

MFS62 May 11 2006 09:39 AM

="Edgy DC"]I think his English is fine. His accent is pretty think but the comprehension and construction is there. I remember reading that as soon as Jose signed his first pro contract, he began taking English classes so he would be ready to speak to fans and reporters "when he made the major leagues". From a teenager, that showed a lot of confidence. Later

Edgy DC May 11 2006 09:41 AM

it looks that way this year, but last year he had a .687 OPS against righties and a .686 against lefties. It's a really touch issue with some guys and almost nobody abandons switch-hitting at the major league level (and even fewer with any success), as it trades one problem --- hitting from your less than natural side of the plate --- for another --- getting jammed by a major-league pitcher when nobody's done that to you since you wree 17 and started switch-hitting.

Benjamin Grimm May 11 2006 09:44 AM

I remember Wally Backman considered batting lefty only. I think he had something like one or two at bats batting left-handed against a left-handed pitcher before he abandoned the idea. I'm guessing that it was in 1988. I remember it as being late in Wally's tenure with the Mets.

sharpie May 11 2006 09:46 AM

JT Snow gave up switch hitting deep into his puzzlingly long major league career.

metirish May 11 2006 09:59 AM

I'm not sure how serious I am about Reyes just hitting righty but he sure looks horrible most of the time hitting left, lunges at the ball it seems to me.

Frayed Knot May 11 2006 12:30 PM

Reyes's speed gives a big advantage to continuing his lefty batting. Backman's bad side was his RH hitting; JT Snow was never a speed guy. Reyes came to switch-hitting relatively late (after he was a pro) so you could argue that he's still evolving that way. He more of a bail-out/slappy hitter from the left side but maybe that's not such a bad thing to be with his speed.

OlerudOwned May 11 2006 01:29 PM

Frayed Knot wrote: Reyes's speed gives a big advantage to continuing his lefty batting. Backman's bad side was his RH hitting; JT Snow was never a speed guy. Reyes came to switch-hitting relatively late (after he was a pro) so you could argue that he's still evolving that way. He more of a bail-out/slappy hitter from the left side but maybe that's not such a bad thing to be with his speed. But it is a bad thing when he keeps getting under the ball. I don't mind him slapping from the left side, but at least slap it toward the ground.

Frayed Knot May 11 2006 01:47 PM

Well yeah, if he's not hitting well then he's not hitting well. My only point is that the difference in his two swings isn't necc a problem because it can fit into his other strengths.

Elster88 May 25 2006 02:24 PM

.311 OBP coming into today will go up with the 3-5 performance. Still not good.

The Big O May 26 2006 04:20 AM

Elster88 wrote: .311 OBP coming into today will go up with the 3-5 performance. Still not good. That's a .311 OBP on top of a .245 batting average, for an ISOobp of .066. Previous Jose Reyes ISOobp numbers: 2003 .027 2004 .016 2005 .027 Or, to put it another way, Jose has more walks (19) in 205 ABs this year than his first ~500 MLB ABs combined (18). If he were hitting .277 (career avg.), his OBP would be around .340. If he were hitting .300, his OBP would be about .360. If .333, it would be around .390. He's tied for 67th in MLB for walks right now. Top 10 among leadoff men and shortstops. He walked 12 times last month, but only 7 this month so far. 12 + (5 * 7) would give him 47 walks on the year, which would eclipse his 2005 total by 20 walks. FWIW, Mookie Wilson hovered around a 0.50-.060 isolated on-base in the late 80s: 1982 .035 1983 .024 1984 .032 1985 .055 1986 .051 1987 .060 1988 .049 Mook's career high in walks was 35. His career line was .274/.314./.349 and .276/.318/.394 with the Mets.

Elster88 May 26 2006 07:41 AM

]If he were hitting .277 (career avg.), his OBP would be around .340. If he were hitting .300, his OBP would be about .360. If .333, it would be around .390. Can I quote this in the Who Gives a Crap thread? Just busting balls....but seriously, until his batting average reaches those numbers, what is the point of estimating the associated OBP? I'm sure everyone here has done the addition in their head that you do here. But it is just hopes and dreams until we see it happen. Even though we all want to assume his BA will revert to career norms but his OBP will not (kind of sucks to think of it that way, doesn't it?), it's not realistic until we see it.

The Big O May 26 2006 07:48 AM

Elster88 wrote: Just busting balls....but seriously, until his batting average reaches those numbers, what is the point of estimating the associated OBP? I don't understand this statement at all. But it seems like you were complaining about Jose's OB-ness, when it's his BA-ness that's not quite up to snuff. He's OB-ing better than he ever has in the majors.

Edgy DC May 26 2006 07:48 AM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on May 26 2006 08:29 AM

Sure, but I think, at his age, there's something to get enthused, if not overly excited about. He lacks in one area of offense, he improves it, but another drops off. Now, that may be a net zero (development-wise, production-wise the net is a lot more subtly measured), but isn't getting different parts of his game going at different times a better thing on which to pin the hopes that he might get them all going at most times than if he continued brandishing the same modest skill in one area and the same lack of skill in another? Development is like that, fits and starts. That three-run homer yesterday was wunnerful. A far better piece of hitting, it seemed to me, than the golf-jobbie the day before.

Elster88 May 26 2006 07:56 AM

I agree with all of that, my optimism is just riddled with fears and paranoia.

Bret Sabermetric May 26 2006 08:06 AM

Edgy's point, which is well taken, is that Reyes is still developing, and unusually haltingly. But the part to be optimistic about is that his overall game is improving, in all parts, even as each part takes two steps forward and one part backward. What would be truly depressing would be if he'd put up another sub-.300 OBP.

soupcan May 26 2006 08:25 AM

Have I mentioned he runs like a freakin' greyhound?

ScarletKnight41 May 26 2006 08:41 AM

Elster88 wrote: I agree with all of that, my optimism is just riddled with fears and paranoia. A man after my own heart ;)

Frayed Knot May 26 2006 08:47 AM

soupcan wrote: Have I mentioned he runs like a freakin' greyhound? Meaning that he runs even faster when we put a fake rabbit on the infield

soupcan May 26 2006 08:53 AM

="Frayed Knot"]Meaning that he runs even faster when we put a fake rabbit on the infield From the IGT of the Wednesday night game: Reyes is like a freakin' greyhound. Ever seen a greyhound in full stride? They move so fast and their movements are so fluid. Its like they are floating just above the ground when they run.

Rotblatt Jun 01 2006 09:34 AM

Reyes in: April: 100 AB, .250 AVG/.330 OPS/.380 SLG/.710 OPS, 10.7% BB, 13.4% K May: 132 AB, .250 AVG/.298 OPS/.424 SLG/.722 OPS, 6% BB, 11% K Historically: .273 AVG/.305 OBP/.405 SLG/.701 OPS, 4.4% BB, 11.8% K So Reyes drew fewer walks in May but STILL outperformed his cumulative average. He also cut down on his K rate. All in all, he continued to progress in the plate discipline department. However, the fact that he's still not hitting for average is disturbing. Is he getting unlucky or is it something more ominous? 2004 (.255 AVG) .289 BABIP, 19.4 LD%, 42.8 GB%, ? IF/F%, 3.1 HR/F% 2005 (.273 AVG): .300 BABIP, 19.6 LD%, 47.2 GB%, 8.1 IF/F%, 3.8 HR/F% 2006 (.250 AVG): .270 BABIP, 22.6 LD%, 45.6 GB%, 9.7 IF/F%, 8.4 HR/F% His batting average on balls in play is, for him, quite low. Let's look at the batted ball type to see why that might be. He's hitting more line drives, which usually equates to more hits (i.e., a better BABIP). He's hit fewer groundballs, which hurt Jose in 2004, but but he's more than made up for that in the line drive department (68.2 LD+GB% v. 66.8% in 2005). In 2004, his biggest problem appeared to be hitting too many fly balls (37.8%), which he cut back on in 2005 (33.2%) and improved on even more this year (31.8%). On those fly balls he does hit, far more are leaving the park (8.4%--a huge jump). This is a good thing, especially since it doesn't seem to have convinced Jose to try and hit more fly balls. The only real negative is that he's producing more weak pop-ups than he has in the past, but that's somewhat mitigated by the fact that he's hitting fewer fly balls overall. I'll go out on a limb and say that Jose's not doing anything wrong here--he's just getting unlucky. He's hitting more line drives, fewer fly balls, and hitting more home runs. I see no reason why he his BABIP shouldn't be back up in the .300 range over the rest of the year--possibly even above that, given how much improvement he's shown in terms batted ball types he's produced. Had Jose's BABIP been .300 over the first 2 months, he'd have the following line: .276 AVG/.336 OBP/.431 SLG/.767 OPS.

Edgy DC Jun 01 2006 09:45 AM

Here's a prediction. In April, he upped his walk average. In May, he upped his slugging average. In June, he'll up his batting average. I remember reading that Ricky Henderson was supposed to re-join the Mets in June.

Willets Point Jun 01 2006 09:49 AM

Edgy DC wrote: I remember reading that Ricky Henderson was supposed to re-join the Mets in June. You're kidding! I guess he's still younger than Franco by a few months but I think he's past his prime.

Edgy DC Jun 13 2006 07:52 PM

With two hits and two walks (compared to one walk for the rest of the team) and three runs in five plate appearances, in a game of immense hugeness, I think some cautious enthusiasm about Jose Reyes is called for.

Willets Point Jun 13 2006 07:53 PM

You were kidding about Ricky, right?

Elster88 Jun 13 2006 08:00 PM

Let's see some stats.

Edgy DC Jun 13 2006 08:05 PM

Willets Point wrote: You were kidding about Ricky, right? He was supposed to return as an instructor. ="Elster88"]Let's see some stats. Sure. Can I make some up?

Elster88 Jun 14 2006 07:38 AM

Nah, I can do it. EDIT: .251 AVG/.326 OBP/.413 SLG//.739 OPS 29 BB, (projected 74.57)

Edgy DC Jun 14 2006 09:04 PM

Four more hits today, including a triple and a caught stealing, and he's up to .761.

TheOldMole Jun 14 2006 09:29 PM

He's the starting shortstop on a team that's running away with the NL East.

Elster88 Jun 17 2006 07:59 AM

Elster88 wrote: .251 AVG/.326 OBP/.413 SLG//.739 OPS 29 BB, (projected 74.57) Three games later: .267 AVG/.337 OBP/.439 SLG//.776 OPS 29 BB, (projected 71.1818)

Elster88 Jun 17 2006 08:00 AM

Where can a young lad find information on league average stats? I'd like to see what the average hitter's OBP is. I'd also like to see what the average leadoff hitter's OBP is.

Edgy DC Jun 17 2006 10:16 AM

I can't find anyone who does the league-wide bottom line. Always a frustration.

metsmarathon Jun 17 2006 11:32 AM

easiest math is to do the team-by-team, and average. or pick the median, for even quicker math. sure, it'll be off by a point or two, but not enough to throw off a perception, i don't think.

Elster88 Jun 19 2006 06:09 PM

Before the 6/19 game opening the Red series: .269/.336/.439//.775 29 BB (pace for 69 BB)

Rotblatt Jun 20 2006 08:13 AM

]Where can a young lad find information on league average stats? Baseball Prospectus. You have to pay for their stats page (which also gets you their articles, PECOTA, etc.), but, IMO, it's totally worth it. They have some really interesting articles and their stats are beyond compare. Anywho, here's the dealeo: NL average: .263 AVG / .333 OBP / .425 SLG / .162 ISO / 0.0869 BB Rate / 1.96 SO/BB Rate / 0.0102 ROE Rate / 0.1703 SO Rate / 72.2 SB% / 13.0 DP% I wasn't sure what "ROE Rate" was, so I looked it up: it's Reached on Error. Here's Jose's line. He's above league average in everything, which is pretty amazing. Averages at or over his 90th percentile PECOTA projections in bold. .272 AVG / .338 OBP / .443 SLG / .171 ISO / 0.0882 BB Rate / 0.1125 SO/BB / 0.0122 ROE Rate / 0.1125 SO Rate / 81.1 SB% / 9.1 DP% By the way, Jose has already bettered his 50th % PECOTA walk prediction in under half the season. If he maintains his current OBP & SLG rates, he'll have exceeded his 75th % predictions, despite carrying a far lower AVG in those percentiles. PECOTA, even in the 90th percentile, didn't think Jose could do better than 39 walks, which (knock on wood) seems like a piece of cake for Reyes now. He's also already matched the 50th % HR total. For shits & giggles: 90th percentile .332 AVG/.373 OBP/.496 SLG/.869 OPS, 10 HR, 70 SB, 24 CS, 39 BB, 66 K PECOTA predicted that his value would be mostly tied up in his AVG. With Jose actually drawing walks, it's throwing their whole projection system out of whack. If Jose's BABIP gets back to normal levels (i.e., Jose stops getting unlucky, which seems to be happening) and maintain his other rates, we could see Jose really take off.

Elster88 Jun 20 2006 08:18 AM

Thanks Rotblatt. If .333 is the league average, I'd say that is a good goal for Reyes for this year.

Edgy DC Jun 20 2006 08:26 AM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Jun 20 2006 11:53 AM

Reyes is fourth in the league in OPS among shortstops. I show them below, with their stolen-base numbers in parentheses, as those can narrow or widen some of the gaps. 1 Bill Hall.910 (2-4) 2 Edgar Renteria.863 (6-8) 3 Omar Vizquel .818 (7-11) 4 Jose Reyes .781 (30-37) 5 Felipe Lopez .769 (20-26) 6 David Eckstein .761 (5-8) 7 Hanley Ramirez .747 (20-24) 8 Jimmy Rollins .731 (15-18) 9 Jack Wilson .721 (2-3) 10 Ronny Cedeno .706 (5-10) 11 Khalil Greene .705 (5-6) 12 Craig Counsell .704 (9-14) 13 Rafael Furcal .664 (16-22) 14 Royce Clayton .640 (3-6) 15 Adam Everett .597 (2-3) 16 Clint Barmes .546 (3-5) He's also second in Zone Rating. Adam Everett, .910 Jose Reyes, .878 David Eckstein, .864 Omar Vizquel, .863 Khalil Greene, .855 Ronny Cedeno, .845 Craig Counsell, .844 Clint Barmes, .842 Royce Clayton, .831 Jimmy Rollins, .830 Jack Wilson, .826 Hanley Ramirez, .809 Rafael Furcal, .799 Edgar Renteria, .798 Felipe Lopez, .794 He may not necessarily be the ideal choice as the All Star at short, but he's a perfectly good one.

RealityChuck Jun 20 2006 11:43 AM

Tom Verdacci makes a case that, with Reyes, they're looking at the wrong statistics and he is one of the best leadoff men in baseball: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/writers/tom_verducci/06/20/reyes/index.html

Hillbilly Jun 20 2006 11:56 AM

RealityChuck wrote: Tom Verdacci makes a case that, with Reyes, they're looking at the wrong statistics and he is one of the best leadoff men in baseball: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/writers/tom_verducci/06/20/reyes/index.html Good read.

Elster88 Jun 20 2006 11:58 AM

The problem with Verducci's argument is we don't really know if Reyes scores so much because he is so fast or because we have some thumpers behind him in the order. I think it's more about his speed, and not Belgadight, but I don't know of a statistical way to prove it.

Edgy DC Jun 20 2006 12:03 PM

Soriano suddenly has an isolated OBP of .065. You don't have to look that hard to see Reyes improving in front of our eyes.

Elster88 Jun 20 2006 12:36 PM

I'm not looking for evidence that he is improving right before our eyes. I'm looking for evidence that he is the best leadoff man in baseball, as Verducci theorized.

Edgy DC Jun 20 2006 12:47 PM

He's not theorizing that. He asks whether Reyes is tops in the National League, and concludes that he's not, but that he's still move valuable relative to other leadoff men than a strict ranking of on-base percentages would indicate. The closest he comes to an actual thesis is in the last paragraph. For now, I'm not ready to concede that Reyes is better as a leadoff hitter than a red-hot Soriano (another mold-breaking No. 1 guy). No one in the league is having a better season from there, even if Reyes is doing so in a most unconventional manner. Reyes is on pace to score 139 runs with an overall .338 OBP. The last player to score that many runs with an OBP that low was Tom Poorman in 1887. So maybe we're looking at a once-every-119-years exception. In any case, Minaya and the rest of Mets country ought not be too worried about Reyes' OBP.

Benjamin Grimm Jun 20 2006 12:57 PM

Verducci says "Call off the deathwatch!"

Elster88 Jun 20 2006 12:58 PM

Edgy DC wrote: He's not theorizing that. Good god. Would you have been happier if I said hypothesized? Call off the language police! I submit!!!

Rotblatt Jun 20 2006 02:41 PM

Nice article. I like it when peeps try to use stats to prove the theories of old skoolers, especially when they're fairly intelligent about it. SC=0. I don't think there's any doubt that Soriano's more valuable offensively than Reyes--for now. If Reyes can get his average up to around .300 and maintain the same K & BB stats--and the same power--it'll be more of a contest. His line would look something like: .300 AVG / .361 OBP / .471 SLG / .832 OPS, 76 SB If he caught fire over the rest of the year and matched his 90th percentile PECTOA AVG (while maintaining the rest of his rate stats) it would be: .332 AVG / .390 OBP / .503 SLG / .893 OPS, 76 SB Soriano: .285 AVG / .350 OBP / .577 SLG / .927 OPS, 41 SB Ah, rampant speculation. Gotta love it!

Edgy DC Jun 20 2006 02:49 PM

]Call off the language police! I submit!!! Don't be so cranky with your four exclamations. Submit to what?

Elster88 Jun 20 2006 02:59 PM

I'm not cranky. I was teasing. Call off the punctuation police. Seriously though, next time I'll use less exclamations. My apologies (SC = zero)

Edgy DC Jun 20 2006 03:18 PM

Called off, just as they were about to bust you for the lower-case g in "god."

cleonjones11 Jun 20 2006 08:44 PM

Is Jose Reyes a shortstop for a championship team? A resounding yes hands down...

Benjamin Grimm Jun 20 2006 08:47 PM

First place team, yes. Championship team, no. Not yet, anyway.

cleonjones11 Jun 20 2006 08:52 PM

Yancy Street Gang wrote: First place team, yes. Championship team, no. Not yet, anyway. I respectfully disagree....thats what makes the world go round. Your right We're in FIRST place BOOYAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Elster88 Jun 21 2006 06:49 AM

You may disagree with as much respect as you want, but you're still wrong as of today.

Benjamin Grimm Jun 21 2006 06:55 AM

Yes. The definition of "championship" may be a little fuzzy. (For example, does a wild card count?) But by any definition, the Mets haven't won a championship during Reyes' time with the team.

Elster88 Jun 21 2006 06:56 AM

.275/.340/.447//.787 29 BB (projected 67.114)

MFS62 Jun 21 2006 06:59 AM

Soriano mold breaking? As a leadoff hitter with power as well as speed? I thought Rickey Henderson broke that mold. As a leadoff hitter with power, speed, relatively few walks and lots of strikeouts? Well, maybe. Later

Elster88 Jun 21 2006 07:07 AM

]Reyes extended his hitting streak to eight games with his double in the first inning and is now batting .500 (17-for-34) with 11 runs scored, seven doubles, a triple, three RBIs and three stolen bases during that stretch. He has no walks in his last seven games. He had three in the game prior to those (2 intentional).

smg58 Jun 21 2006 07:19 AM

Elster88 wrote: The problem with Verducci's argument is we don't really know if Reyes scores so much because he is so fast or because we have some thumpers behind him in the order. I think it's more about his speed, and not Belgadight, but I don't know of a statistical way to prove it. He scored 99 last year, without Delgado and with Beltran and even Wright not hitting like this, while getting on base less often. This year, he's on pace for 139. I think you could argue that the 99 he scored last year had more to do with speed than anything else, but the 40 he's on pace to add have multiple sources. Also keep in mind that the important thing about OBP, especially from the guy getting the most plate appearances, is not so much what it adds to an individual's run total but to the team's as a whole. Runners get advanced, outs are avoided, rallies are prolonged, more AB's come with more guys on base.

Elster88 Jun 21 2006 07:21 AM

smg58 wrote: ="Elster88"]The problem with Verducci's argument is we don't really know if Reyes scores so much because he is so fast or because we have some thumpers behind him in the order. I think it's more about his speed, and not Belgadight, but I don't know of a statistical way to prove it. He scored 99 last year, without Delgado and with Beltran and even Wright not hitting like this, while getting on base less often. This year, he's on pace for 139. I think you could argue that the 99 he scored last year had more to do with speed than anything else, but the 40 he's on pace to add have multiple sources. Also keep in mind that the important thing about OBP, especially from the guy getting the most plate appearances, is not so much what it adds to an individual's run total but to the team's as a whole. Runners get advanced, outs are avoided, rallies are prolonged, more AB's come with more guys on base. I agree with all of this. He did have Floyd last year too, but he also had Cairo/Matsui batting second instead of LoDuca.

Rotblatt Jun 21 2006 07:37 AM

Elster88 wrote: He has no walks in his last seven games. He had three in the game prior to those (2 intentional). True. But he's only struck out only twice in those eight games. Reyes is perilously close to having as many walks as strikeouts (29 to 37) which is something he's only accomplished once, at the age of 16 in rookie ball--and that was only over 101 PA. Of course, I've seen him swing at some horrendous pitches during his latest streak, but he mostly seems to be making good contact with them, so it's tough to argue. At any rate, he's seems to be displaying better plate discipline (statistically) than he ever has at any point in his career. This is a good thing. Frankly, if Jose turns out to be the kind of guy who only draws walks when he's slumping, and the rest of the time, he hits > .350 (ala Ichiro), I'm cool with that.

Elster88 Jun 21 2006 07:42 AM

Rotblatt wrote: ="Elster88"]He has no walks in his last seven games. He had three in the game prior to those (2 intentional). True. But he's only struck out only twice in those eight games. Reyes is perilously close to having as many walks as strikeouts (29 to 37) which is something he's only accomplished once, at the age of 16 in rookie ball--and that was only over 101 PA. Of course, I've seen him swing at some horrendous pitches during his latest streak, but he mostly seems to be making good contact with them, so it's tough to argue. At any rate, he's seems to be displaying better plate discipline (statistically) than he ever has at any point in his career. This is a good thing. Frankly, if Jose turns out to be the kind of guy who only draws walks when he's slumping, and the rest of the time, he hits > .350 (ala Ichiro), I'm cool with that. I agree with all that. But right now I'm just gathering data. I'm not drawing any conclusions or making any judgements on said non-existent conclusions.

Edgy DC Jun 21 2006 08:14 AM

I've seen him swing at some bad pitches during the streak, but far fewer. But I think pitchers are, in general, adjusting to his newfound restraint and coming after him more. And, maybe he's making them pay a little.

Elster88 Jun 21 2006 08:15 AM

That combined with an increasing fear of walking him in general, as his baserunning has gotten more TV play and as Belgadight mash the crap out of the ball.

TransMonk Jun 21 2006 08:31 AM

Elster88 wrote: Belgadight Classic! Soda all over my keyboard.

ScarletKnight41 Jun 21 2006 07:44 PM

Dead men don't cycle.

metirish Jun 22 2006 07:17 AM

Mets that hit for the cycle.. ] Jim Hickman -- Aug. 7, 1963 Tommie Agee -- July 6, 1970 Mike Phillips -- June 25, 1976 Keith Hernandez -- July 4, 1985 Kevin McReynolds -- Aug. 1, 1989 Alex Ochoa -- July 3, 1996 John Olerud -- Sept. 11, 1997 Eric Valent -- July 29, 2004 José Reyes -- Last night Source: Baseball-almanac.com

cleonjones11 Jun 22 2006 01:14 PM

Elster88 wrote: You may disagree with as much respect as you want, but you're still wrong as of today. You know nothing about baseball.Too caught up in Bill James and new style stats. Have you ever played the game beyond little league? You are totally wrong about Reyes Hey! Bring back Elster ya nitwit

Elster88 Jun 22 2006 01:22 PM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Jun 22 2006 01:23 PM

cleonjones11 wrote: ="Elster88"]You may disagree with as much respect as you want, but you're still wrong as of today. You know nothing about baseball.Too caught up in Bill James and new style stats. Have you ever played the game beyond little league? You are totally wrong about Reyes Hey! Bring back Elster ya nitwit I know enough about baseball to realize Reyes hasn't been on a team that won a championship yet. I don't read Bill James, but I've never heard of a writer explain how to tell when a player has a World Series ring. Most people can figure that out on their own. Just not you I guess. Or maybe you just can't read? Try having someone explain my post to you if you're having trouble.

Edgy DC Jun 22 2006 01:23 PM

cleonjones11 wrote: You know nothing about baseball. I'll disagree.

Nymr83 Jun 22 2006 03:46 PM

cleonjones11 wrote: ="Elster88"]You may disagree with as much respect as you want, but you're still wrong as of today. You know nothing about baseball.Too caught up in Bill James and new style stats. Have you ever played the game beyond little league? You are totally wrong about Reyes Hey! Bring back Elster ya nitwit way to be dead wrong. the fact of the matter is Reyes (and the Mets) haven't won anything yet and thus Reyes is, by definition, not a shortstop on a championship team. This has nothing to do with his abilities. As for "new style stats" you may want to try reading about them, its good for you. Or you could continue claiming that the earth is flat and ignore scientific claims to the contrary. your call.

Edgy DC Jun 22 2006 03:49 PM

Somebody post a Billy Wagner Deathwatch thread.

Elster88 Jun 23 2006 07:57 AM

[u:8f68d25853]Mets with a lower OBP than Jose Reyes (pitchers excluded):[/u:8f68d25853] Carlos Delgado Paul Lo Duca Cliff Floyd Xavier Nady Endy Chavez Jose Valentin Ramon Castro Chris Woodward Eli Marrero Lastings Milledge [u:8f68d25853]Mets with a higher OBP than Jose Reyes (pitchers excluded)[/u:8f68d25853]: David Wright Carlos Beltran Julio Franco

Edgy DC Jun 23 2006 08:04 AM

In other words, he unquestionably should be their leadoff hitter. Speaking of batting order, I notice nobody's booing Beltran to send a message to Willie Randolph to bat him second any longer.

Elster88 Jun 23 2006 08:07 AM

Whenever a new page is started people may miss the new posts at the end of the last page. Check out the list at the end of page 7. It's interesting.

Elster88 Jun 23 2006 08:09 AM

="Edgy DC"]In other words, he unquestionably should be their leadoff hitter. Speaking of batting order, I notice nobody's booing Beltran to send a message to Willie Randolph to bat him second any longer. I think it'd be an interesting thing to try. Move the lower OBPs (*cough* LoDuca *cough*) to the end of the lineup. Also move the slowest (second slowest behind Delgado?) guy in the regular starting lineup (*cough* LoDuca *cough*) to the end of the lineup. That would put two of our top three OBPs hitting 1-2. Also our best two runners. I think lineup mathematics say keeping higher SLGs in the middle overrides keeping higher OBPs at the top though.

Edgy DC Jun 23 2006 08:11 AM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Jun 23 2006 08:13 AM

]I think it'd be an interesting thing to try. I'm not deriding the move, I'm deriding the notion that it was an advocacy for that move that prompted Beltran's early booing. I'm all kinds of OK with Valentin and Woodward batting second regularly, and not just when Castro is catching.

Elster88 Jun 23 2006 08:12 AM

For the record, LoDuca has the second lowest OBP of any position player currently on the team or DL, one point above Milledge.

Nymr83 Jun 23 2006 12:09 PM

I don't think anyone is claiming, now that Reyes has shown a great improvement in his walk rate, that the Mets have a better option to leadoff. The biggest complaint anyone might have about this lineup is LoDuca not batting 7th or 8th, but again there is no obvious solution to that unless you want to move guys who are doing really well around (which you may or may not like doing) or if you want to experiment with Nady or the 2nd baseman for the month hitting there.

metsmarathon Jun 23 2006 12:14 PM

loduca's batting second is based more on his ability to make contact, moreso than on his ability to get on base. i think that typically you want your #2 hitter to be your best contact hitter, outside, perhaps, those who would be better served batting first, third, or fourth. and with only 15 strikeouts in 230 at bats, i would think that loduca is performing rather admirably in the task of providing batted balls which may serve to advance the running jose reyes. beltran has 50 strikeouts in as many at bats.

Vic Sage Jun 23 2006 01:33 PM

metsmarathon wrote: i think that typically you want your #2 hitter to be your best contact hitter, outside, perhaps, those who would be better served batting first, third, or fourth.. i think, ideally, you want your #2 hitter to be a hitter you want to give more ABs too than you'd choose to give to the least productive hitter on your team. reyes doesn't need a contact hitter to score. he just needs fewer outs made behind him. i think, by and large, lineup order has little overall consequence, beyond simply giving your best hitters more ABs than your worst hitters. Which is why LoDuca hitting in the top 3, and Wright hitting 5th, is so irritating to me.

Nymr83 Jun 23 2006 03:28 PM

metsmarathon wrote: i think that typically you want your #2 hitter to be your best contact hitter, outside, perhaps, those who would be better served batting first, third, or fourth.. nope. I want my #2 hitter to get on base, and thus be my 2nd best OBP guy that isn't already batting 3rd or 4th (where i've already put my best OPS 3rd, the best remaining SLG% 4th, and the best remaining OBP leading off) ="Vic Sage"]i think, ideally, you want your #2 hitter to be a hitter you want to give more ABs too than you'd choose to give to the least productive hitter on your team. ding ding ding! we have a winner. this is why Cairo batting 2nd was the epitome of stupid. ]reyes doesn't need a contact hitter to score. he just needs fewer outs made behind him. fewer outs would be a better method of scoring him than bunting him over or otherwise making outs. ]i think, by and large, lineup order has little overall consequence, beyond simply giving your best hitters more ABs than your worst hitters. Which is why LoDuca hitting in the top 3, and Wright hitting 5th, is so irritating to me. at the beginning of the year i could have easily said Reyes, Beltran, Wright, Delgado, Floyd, RF, LoDuca, 2B made the most sense. the way Valentin is hitting you can reverse him and LoDuca, but considreing that the Mets lead the NL in runs scored i won't get worked up over it. Ideally, the Mets trade for Vidro and bat him 2nd (if they batted loduca 2nd over him i'd beat willie's head in)

Elster88 Jun 26 2006 07:54 AM

.302/.361/.495//.855 29 BB (projected 62.64) 67 Runs (1st NL, 1st MLB) 10 3B (1st NL, 1st MLB) 34 SB (1st NL, 1st MLB) 98 H (Tie - 2nd NL, Tie - 4th MLB [with David Wright]) 161 Total Bases (5th NL, 7th MLB [David Wright leads the majors in TB]) .302 AVG (Tie - 18th NL, Tie - 40th MLB) .361 OBP (Tie - 35th NL, Tie - 69th MLB)

G-Fafif Jun 26 2006 02:08 PM

An alert MetsBlog reader dug up a May 2005 declaration from Rob Neyer calling Jose Reyes the worst everyday player in the game and doubting he'd ever be much good. http://www.metsblog.com/blog/_archives/2006/6/26/2057264.html Flip side: Buster Olney just declared Reyes the new Rickey Henderson. Ah, the analysts and experts. So good at explaining that what we just saw is what we just saw.

Edgy DC Jun 26 2006 02:26 PM

That's fun, and I certainly recall that, but it looks like Neyer left himself just enough wiggle room. I sometimes get the idea that he hates talking and writing about the Mets and Yankees, because every negative comment he makes is followed by a dozens of e-mail accusations of bias.

Hillbilly Jun 26 2006 02:31 PM

Just goes to show that Baseball Sabermetrics won't always get it right. With Jose we've been hearing about his 'tools' since he was about 17 along with predictions of his can't miss status to superstar future. The sabermetrics are only now beginning to catch on to Jose's performance.

Gwreck Jun 26 2006 03:15 PM

G-Fafif wrote: An alert MetsBlog reader dug up a May 2005 declaration from Rob Neyer calling Jose Reyes the worst everyday player in the game and doubting he'd ever be much good. Neyer gets asked about it in this afternoon's chat: Hayden (NY, NY): Hey Rob, how about those comments last year that Jose Reyes was one of the worst players in the majors? First off, how could a player leading the league in 2 offensive categories (SB, triples) be considered in that realm, and how does that assesment look now? Rob Neyer: (5:12 PM ET ) The fixation on that particular tossed-off chat comment continues to amuse me (a year later I still get multiple questions about it, every week). Anyway, at the time I said that, Reyes had a .300 OBP and was making outs at a prodigious rate. Today, of course, he looks like one of the best players in the league. I'm not sure what's so hard to understand about this.

OlerudOwned Jun 26 2006 03:17 PM

Gwreck wrote: ="G-Fafif"]An alert MetsBlog reader dug up a May 2005 declaration from Rob Neyer calling Jose Reyes the worst everyday player in the game and doubting he'd ever be much good. Neyer gets asked about it in this afternoon's chat: Hayden (NY, NY): Hey Rob, how about those comments last year that Jose Reyes was one of the worst players in the majors? First off, how could a player leading the league in 2 offensive categories (SB, triples) be considered in that realm, and how does that assesment look now? Rob Neyer: (5:12 PM ET ) The fixation on that particular tossed-off chat comment continues to amuse me (a year later I still get multiple questions about it, every week). Anyway, at the time I said that, Reyes had a .300 OBP and was making outs at a prodigious rate. Today, of course, he looks like one of the best players in the league. I'm not sure what's so hard to understand about this. The fact that you implied he probably wouldn't become a 'good' player, Robby.

Edgy DC Jun 26 2006 03:23 PM

Because you used the word worst. That's a red flag and he meant it to be one, so don't complain when the bull lands a few. It's a mistake that far less thinking radio peeps make. You speak in strong terms, you impress people. But some are going to hold you to those terms. I mean, you said something risky --- good for you --- but you accept the consequences if they are in your favor, and you accept the consequences if they ain't. And yeah, his implication is where he gets the wiggle room. To bad he's going to keep wiggling instead of eating a few words. He'll be hearing about this all year at this rate.

metsmarathon Jun 26 2006 03:33 PM

the neyer quote, which is difficult to actually quibble with, given its date 24 May 05: ]Wright's a fine young player and will only get better, but Reyes is, at the moment, one of the very worst everyday players in the majors. He's still only 21 and will of course improve, but it's far too early to predict that he'll actually become a ‘good’ player… was may 24th 2005 too early to predict reyes' future as a good player? prolly. at the time, was reyes actually being very productive? prolly not. times change, don't they?

G-Fafif Jun 26 2006 03:43 PM

Edgy DC wrote: You speak in strong terms, you impress people. A quarter-century ago, there was a load of hype surrounding a fight between Thomas Hearns and Sugar Ray Leonard. The radio host Art Rust Jr. (all we had then) kept guaranteeing Hearns would win. There was no question. None. After Leonard won, caller after caller dialed up Rust to remind him of his dead, solid lock. Rust's plaintive response: "I was wrong." Why more self-proclaimed experts can't toss those three words out now and then is beyond me.

Edgy DC Jun 26 2006 03:49 PM

Exactly. And he survived! Neyer's track record is such that he'd still flourish if he acknowledges he blew that one. In fact, I'd imagine that he's doing more damage to his rep this way.

Nymr83 Jun 26 2006 04:04 PM

]I sometimes get the idea that he hates talking and writing about the Mets and Yankees, because every negative comment he makes is followed by a dozens of e-mail accusations of bias. i'm pretty sure he has explicitly said as much ] Just goes to show that Baseball Sabermetrics won't always get it right. nope, they'll just be right a far larger percentage of the time than the "traditionalists" who don't believe in these crazy ideas like mathematics. Nobody claims to be able to predict everything with 100% accuracy, the goal is merely to improve on previous rates of accuracy in projections.

metsmarathon Jun 26 2006 05:34 PM

]the "traditionalists" who don't believe in these crazy ideas like mathematics. who then use batting average to prove a point. hee.

dinosaur jesus Jun 26 2006 05:43 PM

He was wrong that Reyes wouldn't improve, but I think it's been a surprise to most people just how sudden and dramatic that improvement has been. He wasn't wrong about Reyes's performance last year, though he might have overstated his position a little. I'm not sure what there is to gloat about.

Edgy DC Jun 26 2006 05:52 PM

]He wasn't wrong about Reyes's performance last year, though he might have overstated his position a little. So he was a little wrong about that. And more wrong about the likeliness of improvement. He was also wrong about so casually dismissing his defense.

dinosaur jesus Jun 26 2006 06:31 PM

I'm delighted he was wrong. I just don't think that what he was saying was completely unreasonable at the time.

Edgy DC Jun 26 2006 07:12 PM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Jul 10 2006 10:58 AM

Well, unable to isolate who the regular players were at the exact moment, we had 148 players qualifying for the batting title last year. [url=http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/stats/batting?seasonType=2&type=reg&sort=OPS&minpa=0&split=0&season=2005&pos=all&hand=a&league=mlb&ageMin=17&ageMax=51&qual=true&count=109]Jose was 134th[/url]. That eliminates the many players who were regulars at the time of Neyer's pronouncement, but were subsequently displaced, but it also allows for Reyes's improvement after the comment. Now, of those finishing behind, him, some are catchers or shortstops also. Adam Everett and Jack Wilson seem too far behind him to catch him on defense alone, certainly not after his wheels are factored in. [url=http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/stats/fielding?seasonType=2&sortOrder=true&split=82&groupId=9&season=2005&qualified=null&sortColumn=zoneRating]Looking at the shortstops closer to him[/url], Orlando Cabrera is .021 ahead of him in range factor, to offset him being at .013 behind in OPS. He didn't pile up the steals, but he went 21-23, so I'm going to say he was at least as good. Angel Berroa was .006 ahead in range factor, compared to being .007 behind in OPS. He gets waxed on the baserunning factor, though. Neifi Perez was a top fielder, so he gets to jump ahead, wheels or no. So that leaves him at 135th or 136th out of 148. But there's also a half dozen or so guys above him in OPS that his defense and wheels on face value makes him better than --- Bernie Williams, Scott Posednik, Shannon Stewart, Lew Ford. So at the end of the season, he was about 130th of 148 guys that survived the year, playing good enough, in whatever situation they were in, to stay in the lineup and qualify for the batting title. That's certainly not good. But it's no lost cause. Carlos Beltran, for example, was 112th, and he's one of the top players in the league this year. So you have that modest performance, plus the guy being 21, you'd think that he's a better bet than Neyer seemed to think. Eyeball his bat speed once or twice and you think even more so. That's all. Now, after all that crap, I happily confess that I have the benefit of 20/20 hindsight. 20/15 even.

Elster88 Jun 27 2006 07:20 AM

]Wright's a fine young player and will only get better, but Reyes is, at the moment, one of the very worst everyday players in the majors. He's still only 21 and will of course improve, but it's far too early to predict that he'll actually become a ‘good’ player… I'll confess. I don't see anything wrong with this statement. Everything in it looks true to me.

metirish Jun 27 2006 07:43 AM

From "OilCanShotTupac" on the SoSH KTE ... ] If you haven't seen the Mets this year, you have missed out on some exciting baseball. David Wright is tremendous - but in terms of sheer excitement, he pales in comparison to Jose Reyes. Reyes has poor plate discipline, but has surprising power and can FLY. If you haven't seen him, it's difficult to describe just how aggressive he is on the basepaths. He truly attacks the opposition.

Hillbilly Jun 27 2006 08:44 AM

Elster88 wrote: ]Wright's a fine young player and will only get better, but Reyes is, at the moment, one of the very worst everyday players in the majors. He's still only 21 and will of course improve, but it's far too early to predict that he'll actually become a ‘good’ player… I'll confess. I don't see anything wrong with this statement. Everything in it looks true to me. The interesting thing is that most people that watched him play have been saying he'd likely be great player for years.

Benjamin Grimm Jun 27 2006 08:53 AM

Hence this "deathwatch".

Frayed Knot Jun 29 2006 09:35 AM

Some stuff from [url=http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=5249]Baseball Prospectus[/url] on the Mets in general and Reyes in particular - including some stuff we were talking about the other day (I think in one of the IGTs): Two-time reigning NL Player of the Week Jose Reyes has been otherworldly for the past couple of weeks. After missing two games on June 6th and 7th with wrist discomfort, Reyes came back and hit his generic .286/.333/.429 over three games. The following game, he went 0-3, but drew three walks, which is quite astounding given his well-documented lack of plate discipline. Till that point, in 356 career games, Reyes had drawn three walks in a game once (earlier this year no less) and two walks in a single game just four times. He drew three more walks (two intentional) the next game, but also supported that on-base effort with a single and a double in three at bats. That game set Reyes off on an amazing 13-game stretch (just snapped) in which he amassed 32 hits (13 for extra bases) in 57 at-bats for a.561/.583/.912 line while scoring 19 runs. Reyes still hasn’t drawn a walk since that hat trick game, but it’s hard to criticize him for not getting on base via four balls when he’s smoking the strikes to the tune of .561. Besides, walks aren’t the goal anyway--they’re the byproduct of a good hitting approach. To wit, at the beginning of the season, Reyes was noticeably looking to take walks, which he attempted to make happen by robotically taking pitches. On the surface, that had the look of progress. However, the point isn’t to just take pitches, it’s to take (and subsequently swing at) the right pitches. Reyes’ deliberate attempts to coerce bases on balls often worked against him, as he took a lot of hittable pitches and later in counts remained just as over-anxious and willing to chase a bad pitch as ever. However, as a phenomenal athlete with extremely fast wrists and hips and excellent eye-hand coordination, Reyes has never needed to anticipate pitches, whatever the count may be. His anxiety also tended to make him pull off a lot of pitches, and so he fouled off many hittable pitches. His problems were also compounded by some bad luck on balls in play as he stroked a number of liners right at fielders. His BABIP of .264 before the streak was significantly below his career mark of .306. Contrast his early-season approach to his more recent approach. In this admittedly short stint, Reyes isn’t just deciding in advance whether to swing or not. He’ll still rip at a hittable pitch early in the count, but he’s laying off pitches just out of the zone or even right on the edges. He seems much more comfortable in his ability to wait for a better pitch, which he’s getting and lacing. Later in the count, he trusts his quickness and eye, staying back just a tad more and avoiding chasing terrible pitches. Reyes has been in the league for four years, so it’s easy to forget that he’s still just 23 and capable of further, equally significant improvement. This is especially true since he was rushed and injured; in the meantime, fans waited impatiently for stardom and analysts continually questioned his placement in the lineup. With all the talk of unachieved potential, it’s easy to overlook Reyes’ steady, if slow, improvement over those years. He’s tightened up his defense considerably and his leg injuries, which were verging on chronic and threatened to end his career, are well behind him. Now, he seems to be whittling away his last major weakness. Clearly, Reyes isn’t going to going to continue to hit .500, or .400 for that matter. But the longstanding hopes of .300+ with 70 walks a year and some decent pop all of a sudden might even be conservative.

Elster88 Jun 29 2006 10:49 AM

Edit: Never mind.

Edgy DC Jun 29 2006 10:52 AM

I'll say this, the Mets sure cooled off when he cooled off.

soupcan Jun 29 2006 12:00 PM

Edgy DC wrote: I'll say this, the Mets sure cooled off when he cooled off. Wright too.

Elster88 Jun 29 2006 12:10 PM

Which makes sense. That's our leadoff guy and our MVP. Combine that with the recent weaker starting pitching, and it makes sense that we've been a .500 team over the past two weeks or so.

Edgy DC Jun 29 2006 12:12 PM

When table setters don't get on, RBI-men get fewer good pitches.

soupcan Jun 29 2006 12:20 PM

True dat.

Elster88 Jul 10 2006 08:22 AM

.300/.357/.481//.838 32 BB - Projects to 58.25

Hillbilly Jul 10 2006 10:10 AM

Edgy DC wrote: When table setters don't get on, RBI-men get fewer good pitches. Just one of probaly thousands unmeasured co-variates not captured by baseball stats.

Edgy DC Jul 10 2006 11:02 AM

It's something of a truism, but there is some supporting data out there which I'll try to find.

Hillbilly Jul 10 2006 01:57 PM

I think that you've missed my point. Recent advances in baseball stats have created a neo-geek baseball fan that acts if modern statistical analyses are flawless, as opposed to being an incremental improvement (my view) . I’ve been beating a drum beat that baseball has an incredible number of variables, that all can potentially interact, that will limit what information you get from the exercise. What kind of pitches Wright gets with or without Reyes dancing off of first is just one example. Please recall that recent sabermetric analyses have devalued the stolen base, but the techniques that lead to that conclusion are unable to address what kind of pitches Wright gets with or without Reyes dancing off of first. That's my point. But if your IQ is contained within your forum name you'll probably conclude that I don't believe in mathematics.

Edgy DC Jul 10 2006 02:11 PM

I guess I did miss your point then. My point isn't that dancing basestealers tend to give RBI men better pitches, but that men on base tend to give men at bat better pitches. I only framed it in terms of "tablesetters" and "RBI men" because Reyes and Wright were who we were talking about --- the players on the table, as it were --- and because lineups are constucted in part to put RBI men in a position to take advantage of the alleged phenomenon.

metirish Jul 10 2006 06:58 PM

During the Home Run Derby Joe Morgan was asked about Wright being the NL MVP, he talked about Pujols as his pick but Wright would be #2 and then said Reyes because he makes the Mets click......I at least think that's what he meant.

Johnny Dickshot Jul 10 2006 07:13 PM

Joe went on to say that although he likes Pujols and he likes Wright and Reyes is really what makes the Mets go, he likes Wright because driving in runs is harder than scoring runs, in his opinion. Oy. LoDuca served Wright 16 HRs.

metirish Jul 10 2006 07:14 PM

ESPN had to "bleep" out Wright at least twice after he made outs.

Rotblatt Jul 11 2006 05:50 AM

metirish wrote: ESPN had to "bleep" out Wright at least twice after he made outs. I thought that was hilarious. I caught 2 shits and one fuck. Our little boy's got a potty mouth.

Elster88 Jul 11 2006 07:37 AM

The back page of the Daily Noise advertises the Reyes-Jeter debates. What a rag.

Frayed Knot Jul 11 2006 07:42 AM

Off-days are the mother of insipid stories.

OlerudOwned Jul 11 2006 08:23 AM

Rotblatt wrote: ="metirish"]ESPN had to "bleep" out Wright at least twice after he made outs. I thought that was hilarious. I caught 2 shits and one fuck. Our little boy's got a potty mouth. He progressed as the Derby went on from half-laughing "dammit"s. Fun night all around.

Johnny Dickshot Jul 11 2006 08:26 AM

Though he probably shouldn't have called Bonnie Bernstein a "skanky cunt." That was wrong.

Elster88 Jul 11 2006 08:33 AM

Rotblatt wrote: ="metirish"]ESPN had to "bleep" out Wright at least twice after he made outs. I thought that was hilarious. I caught 2 shits and one fuck. Our little boy's got a potty mouth. I only heard dammits.

Willets Point Jul 11 2006 08:44 AM

Rotblatt wrote: Our little boy's got a potty mouth. Not surprising since he grew up in a town full of sailors that he has the mouth of a sailor.

Elster88 Jul 20 2006 04:01 PM

OBP Team Leaders Sanchez .500 Bannister .400 Wright .389 Beltran .384 Reyes .352 Floyd .348 Lo Duca .342 Delgado .335 Marrero .333 Glavine .333 Castro .331 Nady .331 Valentin .330 Chavez .325 Franco .320 Woodward .317 Milledge .287

Elster88 Jul 20 2006 04:02 PM

Maybe LoDuca hitting second isn't so bad. Maybe Chavez and Valentin should NEVER leadoff.

Nymr83 Jul 20 2006 04:46 PM

]Reyes .352 good. his previous OBPs have been totally unacceptable. This shows a huge improvement and i hope he keeps it up. ]Delgado .335 i guess he's walking more than i thought because the BA is bad right now (not that this number doesnt suck too.) its a good thing that Reyes, Beltran, and Wright are having such good years and the Mets are winning or Delgado would be hte frequent target of criticism (which I haven't heard any of yet, not even from WFAN callers)

Rockin' Doc Jul 20 2006 08:02 PM

Nymr83 - "its a good thing that Reyes, Beltran, and Wright are having such good years and the Mets are winning or Delgado would be hte frequent target of criticism (which I haven't heard any of yet, not even from WFAN callers)" I hadn't really given it much thought, but I would agree with that assessment. He would be hearing the wrath of the Shea fans (as Beltran did last year) if not for the success of the team. Winning has a way of making fans a little more forgiving.

Elster88 Aug 11 2006 11:49 AM

Jose Reyes' OBP: .351 Jose Reyes' BB: 38 (projected 54.48)

Elster88 Aug 11 2006 01:41 PM

Johnny Dickshot wrote: Joe went on to say that although he likes Pujols and he likes Wright and Reyes is really what makes the Mets go, he likes Wright because driving in runs is harder than scoring runs, in his opinion. Oy. LOL. Not sure how I missed this the first time through. Some of you had me convinced for a time there that Morgan had some intelligence. That's over again.

TheOldMole Aug 11 2006 02:25 PM

His BA isn't so bad -- two-ninety-something, isn't it?