Players Who Seemingly Belong In DH Roles

In calculating a player's total sum value, Fangraphs accounts for four factors: Battting (BRAR), Fielding (FRAR), Position (Fangraphs' version of FRAR values all defense equally and thus adjusts FRAR to accord for the difficulty of skill required at position), and Replacement ("the expected value of a replacement level player is about negative 20 runs per 600 PA"). The cumulative value of a player is termed "Wins Above Replacement" or WAR. The better the WAR, the better the player.

WAR, being a composite of two primary metrics, can be increased through offense and/or defense. In the post-steroid, post-Moneyball era, defense has become the underrated commodity of the market; the new OBP. This is how Boston managed to lock up Mike Cameron, a defense-first 4.1+ WAR CF each of the last two and three of the last four seasons, for a two-year deal worth under $16 million (the market value for a win this offseason had been approximately $3.5 million). Not only is defense so often underrated (I'm guilty of it too), it is so often ignored. Plenty of DH's types are parading around in non-DH roles, while other teams utilize players whose defense makes up a useful component of their WARs in the DH role. In a previous article, I noted the following:

As a RF, Dunn's cumulative batting and fielding production gets a -7.5 positional adjustment (UZR measures all defense equally, then accounts for differences in fielding difficulty between positions thru positional adjustments). As a DH, Dunn would get a flat -17.5 positional adjustment and a zero fielding rating. In other words, as a DH, Dunn just get -17.5 runs subtracted from his batting line. As a RF (or LF, for that matter), Dunn gets -7.5 subtracted from his batting line in addition to his lackluster fielding. Thus Dunn, like anyone with a consistent -10 or worse fielding glove at RF/LF, belongs in a DH role.

Fangraphs gives the following defensive position adjustments (all are per 162 games and catchers are excluded, as Fangraphs does not rate their fielding abilities):

• First Base: -12.5 runs
• Second Base: +2.5 runs
• Shortstop: +7.5 runs
• Third Base: +2.5 runs
• Left Field: -7.5 runs
• Center Field: +2.5 runs
• Right Field: -7.5 runs
• Designated Hitter: -17.5 runs

Any player who plays a certain level of bad defense at his position should be relegated to a DH-only role. That level of bad defense per position is at least follows:

• First Base: -5.0 UZR/150
• Second Base: -20.0 UZR/150
• Shortstop: -27.5 UZR/150
• Third Base: -20.0 UZR/150
• Left Field: -10.0 UZR/150
• Center Field: -20.0 UZR/150
• Right Field: -10.0 UZR/150

How many players meet this mark? Here is a weighted list (using total data from the past three calendar years, min. 1200 innings, with a requirement that they have a job as of today) of players with UZR/150 who meet the "DH-only" grade by position; guys you'd rather have at DH than these positions.

First Base:

• Dmitry Young (-13.3)
• Mike Jacobs (-13.0)
• Jason Giambi (-13.0)
• Kevin Millar (-5.9)
• Prince Fielder (-5.7)
• Ryan Garko (-5.1)
• Billy Butler and Aubrey Huff were both borderline

Second Base:

• None, Alexei Ramirez was the worst at -10.6

Shortstop:

• None, Jeff Keppinger was the worst at -17.4, while Yuniesky Betancourt's 2009 FRAR was a brutal, borderline DH -23.9 UZR/150
  

Third Base:

• None, Edwin Encarnacion was the worst at -14.6
  

Left/Right Field:

• Brad Hawpe (-33.0)
  
• Ken Griffey Jr. (-25.0)
  
• Adam Dunn (-24.0)
• Jermaine Dye (-22.4)
• Manny Ramirez (-18.9)
• Delmon Young (-18.9)
• Vladimir Guerrero (-16.3)
• Pat Burrell (-15.9)
• Jason Kubel (-15.4)
• Jose Guillen (-14.5)
• Chris Coghlan (-14.5)
• Michael Cuddyer (-13.0)
• Carlos Quentin (-13.9)
• Jason Bay (-13.6)
• Chase Headley (-13.3)
• Bobby Abreu (-12.9)
• Chris Duncan (-11.6)
  
• Hideki Matsui (-10.4)
  
• Raul Ibanez, Ryan Braun, Brian Giles and Andre Ethier were all borderline
  

Center Field:

• Dexter Fowler (-20.0)

Things of note from this list. There are no teams with non-1B infielders who are so bad that they belong in a DH-role. Dexter Fowler (sample size?) aside, no player at a "premium" defensive position was a total vacuum (well, except for Yuniesky Betancourt) over the past three years. The corner outfield/first base position was a different story. Here, we find a cumulative 24 players who do not belong on the field. That's ten more players than there are DH positions in the AL, highlighting the "DH's who can't find (satisfactory) work" issue that has prevailed over the past two offseasons. On top of these 24, you find another six players who are borderline DH-types (at least at their positions).

Of the players on this list, Chris Coghlan sticks out most as a guy who does not belong on this list. Scouting reports say that he is at least an average defensive 3B and Chone Figgins epitomizes the "Good 3B, Bad OF" paradigm.

Quick DH Rant

Disclaimer: I do not like the DH (which may seem odd as I have a degree in economics and am essentially saying that I do not believe in the division of labor) and I am not here to defend its existence in baseball. I am simply here to defend an underappreciated DH who belongs in a DH-only role.

I was listening to 670 THE SCORE earlier today, and heard a strange comment by Mully and Hanley. Mully and Hanley tried to say "hey look, we love Jim Thome and appreciate all that he's done for Chicago, but he was only a 1 WAR player last season" (in actuality, Thome was a +1.5 WAR player in 3-4 months (he did not play in NL-interleague games) of ABs for the White Sox as a DH, and a -0.2 WAR player off the bench for the Dodgers in extremely limited ABs). Bless their hearts for trying to use Fangraphs and sabermetrics to support their arguments, but it's important to use the statistics right for them to be valuable and effective.

True, Thome is aging, worth "only" about +2 WAR pr 600 PAs and is also limited by both age and health to a DH-only role. +2 WAR is still valuable, but let's just say it's not enough for the Sox. What Mully and Hanley didn't account for, however, is that DH's generally have limited value in general because they provide one-side of the game contribution and get a -17.5 run reduction (-1.7 WAR) from their batting line. In other words, any DH is inherently less valuable and going to have limited value in comparison to "other baseball players" who play the field.

If you are signing a player in general who will play the field, you want a guy who will maximize his total contribution. In the average player, this contribution is a combination of position, offense and defense. Because there are more inputs for the non-DH, a non-DH who does not have Adam Dunn-like fielding abilities will inherently have a higher WAR; especially if they play a premium position like SS. The higher the WAR, the better the player. Teams want +5 WAR guys over the +3 WAR guys and the +2 WAR guys over the +1 WAR guys.

However, the perspective of evaluation must change slightly when you look to sign a DH-only player. A DH-only player only contributes offense. His WAR will be negatively impacted by the fact that he is a DH, no matter how good his bat is. If player A and player B are both equally good at offense, but player A is an average defensive LF (-7.5 run adjustment, +0 fielding runs) and player B is a DH (-17.5 run adjustment), WAR would not be the best method to evaluate which player to sign if you are looking to sign either A or B to a DH-only role. Player A looks better because his WAR is likely to be a full integer higher than B, but that does not mean A will be more valuable than B in the DH-only role. What teams should be looking at when evaluating prospective DH-only role players is not "who had the better WAR," but who had the better Batting Runs Above Replacement (BRAR) line.

Quick tangent, on that note: Rotating mediocre offensive players, whose total value comes from all-around play, through the DH role is a terrible idea. The DH exists to maximize offense. Omar Visquel, who posted +1.3 WAR in limited action (62 games) last season, will not translate into winning additional games if you play him at DH.

You want a guy like Thome because all he can give you is batting and he does it quite well. As I mentioned before, it is one thing if you are someone who can play OF or 1B or whatever. If this be the case, then by all means, please use WAR to compare and contrast players. Here, you want the healthiest, most all-around contributing player. However, this is a DH-only situation for Jim Thome and any team looking to sign him is looking for a DH-only player to play only DH. In this situation, you need to look not at WAR, but BRAR, and note that a DH-only player is bound to have a more limited WAR than comparably good hitting non-DH-only players.

Of all DH's who received 250+ PA's last year, only three (Adam Lind, Jason Kubel and Hideki Matsui) had WARs higher than Thome (who posted a +1.5 WAR mark as a DH for the Sox). Of those three, only Lind was worth +3 or more WAR (+3.7, to be exact). Additionally, all three of Lind, Kubel and Matsui received somewhere between 100 and 200 more PA's than Thome did in 2009.

Thus, we cannot evaluate a DH from last season, who we are prospectively signing as DH for this season, and say "oh he's only an X WAR guy." Obviously the guy whose slightly good at defense and offense combined and plays a valuable position will be worth more in the field, but as a DH, it's about one thing and one thing only. What's your batting line? And Thome's is still good.

__________________

ADDENDUM: I would also here like to here quote an earlier post, as I feel this comment is quite relevant to this overall argument:

"As a RF, Dunn's cumulative batting and fielding production gets a -7.5 positional adjustment (UZR measures all defense equally; Fangraphs accounts for differences in fielding difficulty between positions in WAR calculations thru positional adjustments). As a DH, Dunn would get a flat -17.5 positional adjustment and a zero fielding rating. In other words, as a DH, Dunn just get -17.5 runs subtracted from his batting line. As a RF (or LF, for that matter), Dunn gets -7.5 subtracted from his batting line in addition to his lackluster fielding. Thus Dunn, like anyone with a consistent -10 or worse fielding glove at RF/LF, belongs in a DH role."

The same holds true for any 1B who plays with a -12.5 FRAR (Fielding Runs Above Replacement) or worse glove. They too, like the poor outfielder and frequently unhealthy slugger, belong in a DH-only role. The thing is, it's very hard to be that bad at first base...only Adam Dunn was at least that bad last season...

Is Adam Dunn Underrated?

Is Adam Dunn underrated? Yes, Adam Dunn strikes out a lot (almost 1/3 of the time), plays poor defense, makes minimal contact with baseballs (his career contact rate is 71.5%; the MLB average was 80.5% last season) and has a career batting average just under .250. Still, Adam Dunn has a career OPS above .900. He's walked 913 times in 5417 career PAs (16.9% walk rate, .383 career OBP). Dunn's averaged 39.3 home runs per season (and hit exactly 40 like clockwork from 2005-2008). His .276 ISO over the past 3 seasons is the sixth best mark in the majors, while his 118 HRs over that span are two more than Pujols' 116 and his 339 BB's are second to no one.

And yet, Dunn struggled to find work last offseason when he became a free agent (he didn't officially sign with the Nationals until February 12). This should have come as no surprise to even the most casual Adam Dunn follower. Dusty Baker never appreciated his skill set and J.P. think he's a useless slacker. Heck, even Jason Varitek unintentionally took a shot at Big Donkey.

But it is not as though nobody except his mother likes him. Sabermetric-minded fellows, ranging from the casual and hilarious to the serious and boring (just kidding, I absolutely love THT) have defended Dunn from every jab taken at him. Even we at Game Of Inches have defended the Big Donkey in the past.

But is Adam Dunn underrated?

True, Adam Dunn is a great offensive player (career .384 wOBA), but he's also an equally atrocious fielder, a fact this is often glossed over (as it was in the introductory paragraph to this post). Winning baseball games, if boiled down to the most simplistic mathematical formula, is a differential between Runs Created and Runs Allowed. A run gained with a bat is equally as valuable as the run prevented with the glove.

It is with this maxim in mind that I point out the follow fact which probably eludes the casual Dunn fan: Adam Dunn has been a sub-3 WAR player since 2005. He's been a sub-2 WAR player in all of those seasons except 2007. Over the past two years, Dunn has cumulatively worth under 2.5 WAR. By contrast, B.J. Upton, Andy LaRoche, Miguel Tejada and even Paul Konerko were more valuable in 2009 than Dunn has been cumulatively over the past two seasons. Last season, despite creating 35.5 runs more than the average player with his bat, Dunn was a meager +1.2 WAR player thanks to the 36.3 runs his glove cost the Nationals. Omar Vizquel, who only played 62 games last year, was worth +1.2 WAR.

Yeah, Adam Dunn is that bad at fielding.

Fangraphs values Dunn's +1.2 WAR performances in 2008 and 2009 at just over $5 million in terms of free agency dollars. And yet, the world of baseball was shocked when Dunn was "only" able to sign a contract for 2-years, $20 million. Dunn was paid $8 million last season and is set to earn $12 million this season. Even if Dunn's fielding, which has been on the decline since 2004, is half as bad as it was this season, he will be, assuming that his offensive production remains steady, a +3ish WAR player. In terms of free agency dollars, a 3.0 WAR season would be worth approximately $13.5 million next season. If this is the case, then Dunn would have been "overpaid" by $1 million by the Nationals over the life of his contract -- not bad, essentially market value.

So I beckon the same question again: is Adam Dunn really underrated? Or is he just so underrated that he has become overrated (or at least adequately rated)? What is clear is that Adam Dunn belongs in the AL, playing DH (where players get a -17.5 positional adjustment to their batting line, half of Dunn's negative fielding impact).

__________________________

Valuable Post Script:

As a RF, Dunn's cumulative batting and fielding production gets a -7.5 positional adjustment (UZR measures all defense equally; Fangraphs accounts for differences in fielding difficulty between positions in WAR calculations thru positional adjustments). As a DH, Dunn would get a flat -17.5 positional adjustment and a zero fielding rating. In other words, as a DH, Dunn just get -17.5 runs subtracted from his batting line. As a RF (or LF, for that matter), Dunn gets -7.5 subtracted from his batting line in addition to his lackluster fielding. Thus Dunn, like anyone with a consistent -10 or worse fielding glove at RF/LF, belongs in a DH role.

I'm placing a "Quintessential Sabermetrics Argument" tag on this post because it underlines the unheralded importance of fielding.