This season, Jeff Francoeur hasn’t lived up to expectations. (Not that it is really his fault, because he hasn’t really performed much different than his minor league numbers suggested he would.) He’s batting .256/.309/.422/.731, which puts him last in the National League in OPS(14th of 14) among qualified right fielders. But, this really isn’t news: everybody is aware of Francoeur’s hitting problems…except fans at Turner Field who still give him more cheers than a .400-chasing Chipper Jones.

Yesterday, I was poking around Bill James Online (subscription required) and looked at Frenchy’s Plus/Minus numbers. If you are not familiar with Plus/Minus, it is the principal metric of John Dewan’s The Fielding Bible, which is based on objective video analysis of all players. It is the best defensive metric out there. According to the metric, this season Frenchy is not doing so hot in the field this season. So far, he has made seven plays below what the average right fielder ought to be making, which ranks him 31st among major league right fielders. It’s not what you expect from a Gold Glove winner.

And this is not just some bias against Francoeur in this metric. The system has rated Francoeur positively in the past. In 2006 and 2007 he ranked eleventh and sixth with three and ten plays above average. In The Fielding Bible Award voting, Bill James, John Dewan, and the BIS video scouts rated Francoeur 2007’s best right fielder in the majors. Frenchy isn’t just struggling at the plate this season.

This may just be a product of random variation; but if it’s not, what could be the cause? This past offseason, Francoeur adopted a weight-lifting program in an effort to increase his hitting power. The other day, he stated that the lifting may have made him too tight.

Saturday’s was his third home run in 11 games. Before that, Francoeur had gone six weeks without a homer. He had some doubts about his offseason workout routine of lifting weights four days a week, which brought him to camp heavier and hoping to improve on his 19 homers of a year ago.

“My dad and I talked last night,” Francoeur said. “I don’t know if I did too much weightlifting, if I got too tight.”

Though he is referring to problems with his swing, the bigger problem may be on defense. Tightness and the extra weight may be slowing him down in the outfield.

Another explanation may be the departure of Andruw Jones. If Jones’s superior defense allowed Francouer to cheat toward the line to get balls that other right fielders usually miss, then Jones may have made Francouer look better than his true ability.

The Plus/Minus system has ranked Jones first and third among center fielders in 2006 and 2007. Mark Kotsay, Jones’s replacement, has been a below average center fielder for the past three seasons. The Braves’s primary left fielder for the past three years has been Matt Diaz. In 2006 and 2007, he was an above-average defender making ten plays above average. In 2008, he has been just about average. This is some evidence that Jones may have made Francoeur look better than he was.

I suspect that luck, extra weight, the departure of Jones, and possibly an injury are all contributing factors.

The 2007 defensive Plus/Minus Leaders and Trailers are out. I consider the Plus/Minus system to be the best defensive measurement system out there. Although, the numbers will not be released for all players until after the 2008 season, seeing the top and bottom is useful.

In particular, I wondered how Andruw Jones would fare. In a series of posts this summer, Jayson Stark and I debated Andruw’s defensive ability. Stark argued that scouts and Zone Rating said Jones was on the decline. I countered that Zone Rating was flawed and that I preferred the Plus/Minus system, which showed Jones was still among the best center fielders in the game. Though Andruw’s performance fell off quite a bit at the plate this year, I wondered how his defense looked.

Plus/Minus rates Jones as the second-best fielding center fielder in baseball in 2007, making 24 more plays than the average center fielder. That is one less than Carlos Beltran. Over the past three seasons, Plus/Minus rates Jones as the best, making 63 more plays than average. So, it looks like even if Jones has lost a step, he’s still near one of the best defenders in the game.

And The Fielding Bible Awards, determined by a group of voters, gives Jones the nod over Beltran—probably because of his superior throwing arm, which the Plus/Minus system does not measure.

Center Field – Andruw Jones, Atlanta
Last year Carlos Beltran won the award with Andruw Jones coming in second. This year Jones returned the favor, tipping the scales at 86 points to 80 for Beltran. Jones and Beltran both have great range, but it was probably Jones’ intimidating throwing arm that swayed the voters. It’s interesting that just a year ago Jones seemed to be slipping slightly from the consensus best center fielder he was a few years before. Perhaps we should also crown him “Comeback Fielder of the Year.”

It’s also interesting to note that all of the Braves outfielders score well. Willie Harris and Matt Diaz are +21 and +12 in left field, and Jeff Francoeur is +10 in right field. It will be interesting to see how Andruw Jones does away from the Braves next year, and how the Braves outfield changes without Andruw Jones in the lineup.

Jayson Stark was kind enough to send a rebuttal to my comments on the Andruw is overrated debate. Here is the post he is responding to, and here is my original post on the subject.

Hi J.C.
I was referred to your latest blog by a friend. And I found it reasonable and insightful. I appreciate the way you framed the debate, as opposed to the way some people have been interpreting it.

I’ve never claimed Andruw was now an inferior centerfielder, or a below-average centerfielder. And I certainly have never said he’s some broken-down stumblebum, as Scott (Boras) has been insinuating. But it seems to me that we both agree with the premise that he has regressed somewhat since his peak — at least until this year, when he happened to get back in tremendous shape in what was (coincidentally, I’m sure) a major contract year. Even if he has regressed 52 putouts a year, that’s still two balls a week he’s no longer getting to that he used to. And the fact was, I didn’t only use his best year as a comparison. Even his second-best year, in 2001, represented nearly 100 more putouts than last year, in only two more games played.

Did I break this down as closely as you did? Obviously, I didn’t. But there HAD been a definite decline no matter how you break it down. Basically, we’re only debating how much of a decline. Am I correct?

And I didn’t just use stats as my guide here. As I said in the email I sent Dave O’Brien, Scott would be shocked by what scouts and GMs and other club executives have been saying about Andruw over the last few years. THEY think he has declined. I know that. And I still hear that. In fact, after I wrote in that email that I would still take Andruw over Torii Hunter, one scout who read it called me and said, “You’re wrong. In that series in Minnesota last week, Andruw was the second-best centerfielder on the field - by far.”

It would be tempting to pass along some of the even more harsh assessments i’ve heard. But I have no desire to do that because I’ve been consciously trying NOT to bash Andruw, who I still think (and say repeatedly) is a tremendous player in many respects, and highly employable, obviously.

I also wanted to make the point that when I first started talking about Andruw, this was not all about defense. Andruw’s offensive issues are readily apparent. And as I wrote in the book, even his 50-homer season was misleading in some ways, because all the Sabermetric indicators rate it as the least productive 50-homer season of all time. But I’ve found that the conversations and interviews have evolved away from the offensive part of the topic and gotten us stuck in a debate over Andruw’s defense. That was never my original intent. But especially in these interviews, there’s limited time to get into everything.

So all I really attempted to say in that chapter was that here we have a guy who burst onto the scene in the ‘96 World Series, was so good so young he had his GM invoking Hank Aaron as a comparison, and he hasn’t really been all that we expected. Now maybe we expected too much. But that’s a separate debate.

The other part of this argument is that we have this impression now of Andruw as this 50-home-run-hitting, nine-0time Gold Glove winner — and when you hear that, you’d think he was Willie Mays reincarnate. In fact, Scott loves to drop Willie Mays into all the Andruw conversations. But the fact is, THAT impression is misleading and over-inflated. And THAT’S where Andruw is overrated.

This book is about perception, and performance relative to that perception. And what’s been lost in this is that THAT’S what I wrote. People have been focusing way too much on defense, and this chapter was really more about the big picture. So I want you to know that your blog has helped remind me to readjust the focus of this conversation, so that future discussions ARE about the big picture and not just on how we interpret defensive numbers.

I’m a reasonable guy, just trying to raise reasonable issues. But people’s emotions have caused this debate to veer into a whole different sphere. So if you could do your part to help redirect us back into an arena where normal people can agree to disagree and debate in a more relaxed, this-is-what-baseball-fans do kind of climate, I’d be greatly appreciative.

Thanks for hearing me out.
Jayson

After discussing this a bit further with Jayson, it seems that we agree on what type of player Andruw is, but we differ on how the general public perceives him. And Stark may have the edge in gaging this perception, because most of what I hear from Braves fans is how he is responsible for all Braves losses…and possibly the Iraq War. Thus, Stark thinks he is overrated, and I don’t.

So, when you are ordering your copy of The Baseball Economist, save on shipping and pick up The Stark Truth while you are at it.

Well, not to me but to Scott Boras on David O’Brien’s AJC blog. Boras’s initial comments were posted by DOB on Tuesday.

But was he exactly the same player over the last few years that we perceived him to be? No. And Scott can manipulate his own numbers and “indexes” all he wants. But he can’t explain away those 100 balls a year that Andruw used to catch that he wasn’t catching anymore - until, by some remarkable stroke of fate, he got himself back in A-1 shape this year in a contract year (and now is magically catching them again). Do the math. If the guy was down 100 putouts a season, that’s four balls a week he used to catch that he wasn’t catching anymore.

I said in the book that I was surprised to see those numbers myself. But I didn’t make them up or manipulate them. They’re real. And Scott’s trashing of Zone Rating is purely his way of discrediting research he doesn’t agree with.

I only looked at Zone Rating because my initial inclination, as I wrote in the book, was NOT to believe the raw numbers. I wanted to factor out variables like whether the Braves’ staff had more ground-ball pitchers than it used to, etc. The defensive stat that does that best, in my opinion, is Zone Rating.

I’ve asked plenty of sabermatricians about Zone Rating. And they sure characterize it differently than Scott does. It doesn’t assign wider zones to players like Andruw because he’s so good. All centerfielders are assigned the same zone. So how does it penalize players with more range?

Andruw’s Zone Rating dipped in exactly the way his other numbers dipped. He used to lead the league. Last year, he finished at the bottom of the league. Any attempt to explain that away is an attempt to make the conclusion differ from the facts - which was the opposite of the way I went about it.

First, let’s talk about those 100 balls a year that Andruw is no longer getting to. Well, that is a bit of an exaggeration. From Andruw’s “The Guy” period from 1998–2002 (as defined by Stark in his book), the difference from 1998–2002 to 2003–2006 is 62 raw putouts, not 100. From his best year to his worst year the difference is 128, but it’s a little unfair to compare peaks and valleys, especially because some of this is a function of playing time.

Andruw averaged 449 put-outs per 162 games played from 1998–2002. From 2003–2006, he averaged 397 put-outs per 162 games played. Comparing his best years to his worst years in raw put-outs is deceiving. After you control for games played, the difference is down to 52 putouts a year. If you normalize it by innings played in CF, and assume he played as many innings as he did in his best year (1999) the difference is down to 43. In fact if you include his 2007 campaign, Andruw is on a pace to put out 494 batters in 1447 innings (his 1999 playing time), which is about equal to his career high. The difference from “The Guy” to the present averages is only 26 put-outs.

Year    Games   Innings PO     PO     PO
           		(Raw)  (162G) (1447 Inn)
1998    159    	1373    413    421    435
1999    162    	1447    493    493    493
2000    161    	1430    439    442    444
2001    161    	1435    461    464    465
2002    154    	1357    404    425    431
2003    155    	1329    390    408    425
2004    154    	1347    389    409    418
2005    159    	1366    365    372    387
2006    153    	1317    378    400    415
2007    63	557    	190    489    494

Mean    1998-2002       442 	449    454
Mean    2003-2006       381	397    411
Mean    2003-2007        	416    428

Now, this is not an insubstantial difference, but it is much smaller that what Stark claims it to be. I don’t think Stark is trying to manipulate the numbers, I just think he’s not looking at the big picture.

Now, let’s move on to Zone Rating, which is a rate statistic. The problem is that the traditional Zone Rating reported by ESPN is deeply flawed. Players are at a disadvantage if they are making plays outside of their zone, because an out-of-zone play is treated as a part of the player’s zone for that play. The out-of-zone put-out goes into both the numerator and denominator of ZR. If a player is making shifts from a standard zone, this can actually hurt a player, and he is not awarded extra credit for making an out-of-zone play (see here for a full explanation). I don’t know of any stat-head who considers zone rating useful, nor would I care if anyone did. Zone Rating is flawed in its design for punishing players who make plays outside of their zone.

While Stark responds specifically to Boras, he has yet to respond to what the superior defensive metrics indicate about Andruw: he is still one of the best in the game. If you want to find a metric that treats all fielders the same, why not go with the Plus/Minus system created by the man to founded Stats, Inc. and invented Zone Rating? It’s a system that employs several video scouts to plot the speed, trajectory, and location of all balls hit to all fielders over several seasons. If you are worried about the influence of the pitching staff, this is the metric that you need to use.

I would like to add that I like Jayson Stark, and I think he is a good writer. I just disagree with him on this. It’s not like he’s an idiot for using ZR. In fact, I applaud Stark for objectively evaluating Andruw. If ZR didn’t measure Jones as declining, Jones wouldn’t have made the list. He has no reason to bash Andruw just for the sake of doing so. It’s not widely known that ZR has serious problems and that a superior defensive metric exists. And it just so happens that it makes a big difference in Andruw’s case.

I first became aware that Andruw Jones was going to be the lead story in Jayson Stark’s new book The Stark Truth: The Most Overrated and Underrated Players in Baseball History during a radio interview several months ago. In the discussion Stark mentioned that Andruw Jones is not as good as people think he is and that he would be explaining why in his upcoming book. I was anticipating what he had to say when, lucky for me, ESPN.com published an excerpt from the book on Jones.

What does Stark mean by overrated? Well, that is a tough one, which he admits. It is certainly subjective, and while some people might think Andruw Jones is the greatest center fielder in history this is not the consensus. Stark clearly doesn’t think the public sees Andruw in this class, just in a class higher than he should be.

What does the baseball public think of Jones? Well, in his 10+ year career he has made five All-Star teams, all during excellent offensive seasons (OPS+ > 120). His career OPS+ is 117, which is good, but not outstanding, offensive production for a center fielder. On defense Jones is considered to be one of the best in the game winning nine straight Gold Gloves. I’d say the baseball watching public considers Jones to be a good hitter and an excellent defender. So, how does Jones stack up to Stark’s case?

Luckily, Stark gives up a reference point for judging excellence in center field.

[Center field is] the position of Mays, Mantle, and DiMaggio. Of Cobb, Puckett, and Griffey. Those aren’t just names on a lineup card. Those are names that conjure up magic. This is the glamour position in baseball. Nothing else is close.

Did you catch that? Read over the list of names again. Kirby Puckett? Are you kidding me? Don’t get me wrong. Kirby Puckett was a very good player, but is nowhere close to the class of the other players on the list. In fact, Andruw Jones’s career OPS of 117 is quite similar to Puckett’s 124—and don’t forget that Puckett was forced to retire near the top of his game. Hey, I’ll grant that Puckett was the better player, but I’m a bit uneasy saying that Jones falls well short of of Stark’s own standard. Puckett is more similar to Jones than he is to the other players on the list. Maybe Puckett would have been a better choice for an overrated center fielder if people really do consider him to be as good as Mays, Mantle, DiMaggio, and Cobb.

Let’s look at offense first. Stark quotes a scout who describes Jones’s offense as “not very good.” Now, I’m not sure how to interpret the quote. Taken literally, Jones is not a very good hitter; but, when I’m at a family reunion and someone says, “this congealed salad isn’t very good” I skip it. It’s not like Jones is known for his bat: he’s garnered only one Silver Slugger award, and three are handed out every year. While his offense wouldn’t be anything special for a corner outfielder, he’s more than adequate for his position. For the previous three seasons he’s finished second in OPS among center fielders (2004, 2005, 2006), and I have little doubt that he will finish this season near the top.

Now let’s move to defense. Here is where Stark makes most of his case. He acknowledges that Jones was once one of the best defenders at his position, and he believes he is living off a reputation that is no longer deserved. As he did for offense, he cites the opinion of a few scouts that Jones’s defense has declined.

“I first noticed it two or three years ago,” he said. “Just from sitting there, scouting, watching balls dropping in that should have been caught. I’m not talking about balls that needed to be dived for. I’m talking about balls that should be caught.”

I surveyed other scouts. They’d begun to see the same things. Not getting the same jumps. Not reacting. Not putting in the defensive effort he used to. His body getting thicker. A sudden obsession with home-run hitting over everything else.

Stark doesn’t just believe these words, he goes to some numbers. There is no denying Andruw’s putouts are down from the mid-400s to the 370s—though Jones is on a pace for around 450 putouts in 2007. Stark says this can’t be because the composition of his pitching staff as changed, because his zone rating has fallen. Here is where Stark’s argument falls apart. There is no denying Jones isn’t a zone rating wonder, but zone rating doesn’t tell us much about defensive prowess.

Zone rating is a seductive statistic because it seems like a batting average for hitters. How many outs did you generate from chances withing an a somewhat objective zone? What a nice idea! The problem is that zone rating is very sensitive to balls that players catch outside of their assigned zone. It’s one of the reasons that the inventor of zone rating, John Dewan, abandoned his creation and developed an entirely new method for evaluating defense—more on that in a moment.

Three years ago I wrote a post, Thoughts on Zone Rating, using Jones as an example of why zone rating is flawed (it comes up number one in the Google search for “zone rating problems“). The basic problem is that defensive shifts allow fielders to catch more balls outside of the zones, but also causes them to give up balls hit in zones. Fielders are asymmetrically punished and rewarded for players made and not made in and outside of the zone. I’m not going to rehash the argument, but the quick summary is that the way outfield defense is played today, zone rating has some problem evaluating players, especially when they are catching balls outside of assigned zones.

The problems with ZR extend beyond my critique, and its flaws became so obvious that its creator John Dewan developed two new defensive measures: Revised Zone Rating and the Plus/Minus System. Both are presented in Dewan’s amazing book The Fielding Bible. (I’m also excited to learn that a new volume is scheduled for 2008…Yes!) While the latter measure is superior, I want to focus on Dewan’s revised ZR, because of some information presented in the book that shed’s light on traditional ZR.

Rather than include balls out of a fielding zone in the traditional ZR metric, the revised system credits balls caught out of the zone separately. On page 234 we see that from 2003–2005 Jones made 218 out-of-zone plays—40 more than Juan Pierre (in 53 more innings played), 49 more than Johnny Damon (in 10 fewer innings played), 63 more than Vernon Wells (in 92 more innings played), and 64 more than Carlos Beltran (in 53 more innings played). Long story short: Andruw Jones is good at getting to balls outside of his zone, and because one of weaknesses of traditional ZR is handling balls out of the zone we ought to be wary when using it to judge Jones.

Next, let’s go to the Plus/Minus System. This is Dewan’s masterpiece: a system based on objective video analysis of how players field balls according to the speed, trajectory, and location of batted balls relative to other fielders playing the same position. It’s frickin’ awesome. To use zone rating to evaluate fielders when this system is available is like using a wooden tennis racket at Wimbledon today. How does Jones do in the Plus/Minus system? Using the original Plus/Minus metric presented in The Fielding Bible, from 2003–2005 Jones made 26 more plays than the average center fielder, putting him behind only Torii Hunter (+44) and Aaron Rowand (+34). Furthermore, Dewan awards Jones Gold Gloves in all three seasons.

Dewan published a few results from an updated system that more precisely measures fielding in The Bill James Handbook 2007. Jones performs even better in this system. From 2004–2006 Jones made more plays than any other center fielder—48 more than the average center fielder and three more than the next closest player (Corey Patterson). In 2006, Jones finished second only to Patterson (+34) by making 30 more plays than average. He’s still got it!

The funny thing about this is that before the Plus/Minus system came into being I thought Andruw was underrated as a defender. Rumors of Jones’s defensive decline have been discussed openly for years, but I never saw it. I believe that the main reason for this is that Jones isn’t as skinny as he used to be. Hey, who isn’t? And though his speed may have declined some that was never what made Andruw Jones so good. I have never seen any player take routes to balls as well as he does. His defensive gift is less about his legs and more about his ability to know where any ball is going faster than anyone else. It is almost as if he folds space as he runs, because he consistently gets to balls that I expect to be hits.

I was happy that Dewan’s system confirmed my thinking, and I would have been prepared to admit that my eyes had been deceiving me if it had shown otherwise. Quantifying defense is difficult and only now are we coming close to understanding how to evaluate fielders. Zone rating has its heart in the right place, but it has little value. I would rather judge a hitter solely by his batting average than judge a fielder by his zone rating.

So, is Jones overrated? Well, I think it’s pretty clear that he is a good-hitting center fielder who is one of the top defenders in the league. That is how I have him pegged, and I suspect the perception of the public is not much different.

I have received numerous requests to discuss Jayson Stark’s excerpt “The Most Overrated CF of All Time.” Believe me, I have plenty I want to say, but I have had too much other stuff going on. I should have a post on it by Monday, so stay tuned.

Dave Studeman interviews John Dewan, author of The Fielding Bible, at The Hardball Times. They talk about the book, Baseball Info Solutions, and ACTA Publishing. I’ve seen several interviews with John, and he seems like a really interesting fellow who is quite gracious. One thing I know is that John is very good at what he does, and I suspect there are more good projects on the way.

I have been quite impressed with The Fielding Bible, and I find myself looking at it every time I watch a game. I think the method is sound, and I am quite comfortable with the results. I don’t think it will be long before the Plus/Minus rating is a regular fielding category on baseball stats websites.

Let’s think some more. How difficult is it for Andruw Jones to catch up to Lee and Pujols in linear weights (that is, the amount of runs he produces above the average player) on defense? The nice thing about LWTS is that you can measure runs saved as well as runs produced.

Let’s assume that an average fielder could not make 10% of Andruw’s outs . That number is way high, by let’s try and get AJ’s numbers up at the high end. And let’s further assume he’ll end up with 400 put outs plus assists (again, this is high). That gives Andruw 40 extra outs over the average fielder. What are these outs worth. Let’s assume he turns 20 singles, 10 doubles, 5 triples, and 5 home runs into outs (do you get the picture that I’m trying to go beyond generous?). Given the LWTS for these events that means Andruw saves just about 30 runs above average on defense. Assuming Pujols and Lee are average fielders, that is they save no runs on defense over the average player, AJ is now just about equal with Pujols and still many runs back of Lee. The point is, even with wildly exaggerated numbers that favor Andruw, he’s still barely catching up.

Wilson Betemit
Betemit, once considered the jewel of the Braves system, has failed to live up to expectations. Nevertheless, he is still just 24 years old and had a decent year in Richmond (.278 with 13 HR 24 2B, and 2 3B). While he is no longer considered a future star, he still could make an impact with Atlanta this year. Betemit will be competing for the final utility infielder’s spot with Pete Orr. Because Orr can also play outfield, Betemit is going to need an outstanding performance this spring to make the big club.

Julio Franco
The ageless wonder, Julio had another great year in 2004. He will turn 47 in 2005, but as long as he produces, he will have a place to play in Atlanta. In 2004, he hit .309, with 18 doubles, 3 triples, 6 home runs and 57 RBIs. With runners in scoring position, his average was .347 (33-for-95). He continues to prove that age indeed is just a number. He will continue to get the majority of AB’s against LHP, and will probably have another solid season. It really is a shame he was only given 162 AB’s from 1997-2001; he could be approaching 3000 hits and a spot in the hall of fame had he been given a chance somewhere.

Marcus Giles
Giles was off to a scorching-hot start to his 2004 season, leading all NL second basemen in the first tally of all-star voting. Unfortunately, his season was soon interrupted for 6 weeks due to another random injury. Once he returned from the injury, he did not hit at the same level as before, mainly because his collarbone fracture kept him from lifting weights, and his power was down significantly.

Giles still hit .311 last year, but hit .393 with 14 RBI in April. You could feel that Marcus was going to have a huge 2004, until his injury really set him back. As long as he avoids another freak injury, he should have a great year. Marcus has the ability to be the best hitting second baseman in all of baseball, and this may be the year he proves that.

Rafael Furcal
Fukey had a great season in 2004, marred only by off the field problems with the law. I was there at game two of the NLCS when he hit the walk-off bomb to beat Houston in extra innings…what an exciting ballgame. Rafael plays a solid shortstop, has a cannon for an arm, and is a very good leadoff hitter. He was 29-35 on steals, and scored over 100 runs for the second consecutive season. He has also shown excellent plate discipline the last two years, with a very low 1.24:1 strikeout to walk ratio.

Rafael earned a nice raise this off-season, signing a one-year deal to avoid arbitration. With another strong season, he will be in line to earn big bucks on the free agent market after the 2005 campaign.

Pete Orr
Orr came out of nowhere to have as good a season as anyone did in the Atlanta minor league system. His breakout season included a .320 average, 24 steals, 16 doubles, and 10 (yes, ten!) triples. He also only made four errors all season, while Betemit made 16. Throw in his ability to play a competent outfield, and Pete Orr looks like a great utility big leaguer. He is already 25, but is only a year older than Betemit. He is in a battle with Betemit this spring to win the final bench spot, and his superior season last year coupled with his versatility give him the edge in my opinion. Betemit is considered by scouts to have more tools; however, the sabermetrician in me simply cannot ignore the stats Orr put up in Richmond last year. I will take proven production over tools any day of the week.

Adam LaRoche
Adam is a guy who I happen to know personally, and I look for big things from him in 2005. A sore shoulder nagged him for the entire first half, and his swing was weak as a result. However, once his shoulder had time to heal after the break, his numbers recovered nicely. His 10 HR, 15 2B and .302 batting average left his second half OPS at a very respectable .943, almost 250 points higher than his first half OPS of .648. He also hit the game tying double off the unhittable Brad Lidge in game two, and a mammoth bomb to put Atlanta on top in game four during the NLCS.

Adam was always compared to Mark Grace coming up through the minors, and he put up Grace-like numbers in 2004- even as a rookie playing with an undisclosed injury for half of the season. While Julio Franco continues to amaze, it is safe to say that he will not play forever (though I wouldn’t rule it out!). Bobby needs to slowly give Adam more AB’s against LHP this season to ease the adjustment when he takes over full time for Julio. He isn’t likely to ever have a 30-40 HR season, but is a good bet for a nice stretch of .300-20-90 seasons. If Adam continues this season to hit the way he did in the second half last year, this year may be the first in a long run of very good seasons.

Chipper Jones
Obviously, 2004 was not Chipper’s best year. His numbers were down in almost every category last year, though his 30 HR were up from his 2002 and 2003 numbers. His batting average, OPB, and OPS were all down significantly from his prior years and his career averages. Throughout the first half of the season, he was in and out of the lineup and never really was able to find a groove at the plate. The amount of sprinting, stopping, and starting quickly that is required in the outfield certainly was not good for his injured hamstring. As a result, the Braves moved him back to third, and he responded by playing excellent defense and hitting .337 with 11 HR in August.

Chipper will turn 35 this year, and is still scheduled to make a ridiculous amount of money over the next several years. However, being the consummate team player, he had no qualms with offering to restructure his contract to allow the team more payroll flexibility in their pursuit of a long-term deal for Tim Hudson and other potential free agents. He is at the tail end of his prime years, and needs a strong 2005 to prove that last year was just an aberration based on injuries. I believe Chipper indeed will rebound with a strong season this year, and return to his 30+ HR and 100+ RBI years of years past.

Andy Marte
Marte is one of the top ten prospects in all of baseball, and is very close to graduating from prospect to big leaguer. The only problem facing Atlanta is finding him a place to play. He led the organization in homeruns with 23, and showed a good eye, walking 58 times. Marte has the tools to please the scouting crowd, and the track record and stats to please the sabermetric crowd. He is a big time prospect who looks like a future Major League star.

Unfortunately, in the short term, it is not clear where he will be playing. His defense is too good for him to be moved to the outfield, yet Chipper’s hamstring is not strong enough for him to play outfield. Essentially, the Braves are faced with a problem where they have two great third basemen, neither of whom can be moved to the outfield, where they have a weakness. In conversations with Rob Neyer of ESPN, he expressed his opinion that we will see Chipper playing first base when Marte is ready. This leaves a tough decision of what to do with LaRoche, and Rob foresees him being traded for outfield or pitching, or even possibly a shortstop to replace Furcal next year. It will certainly be interesting to see how things play out, and the best thing we can do as fans is to just trust Schuerholz to make the right decision…he usually does.

Nick Green
(Written before Green was traded to Tampa Bay)
Thrust into the spotlight following the injury of Marcus Giles, Greenie filled in admirably with the bat and the glove. He was leading the International League in batting with a .377 average when he was called up, and hit .273 through 249 at bats in the big leagues. He only hit three homeruns, but one was a dramatic three-run jack to tie the game in the bottom of the 9th against Montreal.

With Giles returning to full strength, Green will be a relegated to reserve status this year. He proved that he can be a solid major league 2nd baseman last year, and will be a valuable member of the team coming off the bench in 2005.

Luis Hernandez
Hernandez was a surprising addition to the 40-man, as 2004 was his first good season with the bat. However his defense is amazing, and .272 is ample for a SS who has a great arm and glove. He is quick in the infield, but is not a threat to run (4-10 SB). He is listed at only 5’10” 140, but again, size is not an issue for a shortstop. He plays the same position as Pena and is a level behind him, but is only 20 years old. Luis figures to play everyday in Mississippi this year, and hopes to gain strength and increase his offensive production. If he handles AA pitching while continuing to amaze at short, will be a serious candidate for the 2006 shortstop job if Furcal leaves for free-agency.

Scott Thorman
Thorman is a former first round pick, who has some serious raw power. However, that tool has not translated into consistent numbers. He had a couple good years, but followed them with a bad year. In four years of pro ball, he has had the following batting averages: .227, .294, .243, and .299. Scouts say he has the best pure power in the Braves system. He should open up 2005 in AA and needs a good season to maintain prospect status.

Tony Pena Jr.
Pena played everyday in Greenville in 2004, and put together a solid season. His .255 average was not great, but his peripheral numbers were solid. His 11 HR, 22 2B, and 25-38 SB show signs that he can hit big league pitching. This spring it will be very interesting to see how Pena fares against the big league arms. Like Hernandez, his fate with the organization is heavily dependent on the outcome of Furcal’s free agency. However, if Pena does not develop more plate discipline, he might have a hard time hitting big league pitching. Walking just 16 times, compared to 108 strikeouts in 495 AB is simply not acceptable. If Pena has one goal in 2005, it should be to cut down on the strikeouts and increase the walks. History shows that the guys who have good plate discipline in the minors translate to better big league hitters than those who do not. Major League pitchers have such good stuff that free-swinging minor leaguers usually turn into strikeout machines in the majors.

Johnny Estrada
Johnny burst onto the scene last year by making the All-Star team, had the highest batting average on the Braves, and being chosen for the team of MLB stars to tour Japan this off-season. Not a bad first year for the guy who was a “throw-in” in the Kevin Millwood trade. He finished the season batting .337 with RISP and .314 overall. His defense could be improved, as nine errors are quite high for a catcher, but if he continues to hit as he did in 2004, the occasional defensive miscue can be overlooked.

Estrada established himself as a very good Major League player last year; he now must prove that last year was not a fluke. He only struck out 66 times in 462 at bats, and while only hitting nine homeruns, did hit 36 doubles to lead the team. His offensive output is rare for a catcher, which makes him all the more valuable to Atlanta. If Johnny has another strong season this year, he may be mentioned alongside Jorge Posada and Pudge Rodriguez when talking about the best hitting catchers in baseball.

Eddie Perez
There isn’t too much to say about Eddie that we don’t already know. He calls a good game, blocks the ball well and throws well. He is a great backup catcher and sub when Estrada needs an off day. He is also a valuable presence in the clubhouse, as he has been known to mentor many of the younger Latin players and help ease their transition to the glitz and glamour of the Major Leagues. While he is not still in the bigs for his offense, he actually finished the season strongly last year, hitting all three of his homeruns and batting .314 during August and September. He figures to hold down the same role this year as he did last year, and should perform at roughly the same level.

Kelly Johnson
Johnson is a converted shortstop who had an excellent
bat for a SS, but saw his prospect status fall slightly after being
moved to the outfield. He tied for Southern League lead last year
with 35 2B, while ranking 2nd in extra-base hits (54), and tying for
5th in hits (135). KJ had a very solid 2004, but is not mentioned
with the Martes and Francoeurs when talking about Atlanta’s OF
prospects. However, Kelly was a first round pick and has hit well
at every level in his minor league career. In fact, Mark Bowman
recently reported in his Braves mailbag that Kelly had been
impressing Bobby with the bat this spring. He figures to play
everyday in Richmond this year, and compete for playing time in
2006.

Brian Jordan
Brian had some great years in Atlanta, carrying them at
times during the 1999 and 2000 seasons. Before the 2002 season the
Braves did an excellent job of exploiting the market on baseball
players, “selling” him at his highest value in the trade with LA
that brought Gary Sheffield to Atlanta. Brian was a fan favorite in
Atlanta and gave the Braves several very productive years. However,
that was three years ago, and he will be 38 by opening day. His
numbers have decreased as his injuries have increased in each of the
last three seasons. The physical toll his body took playing three
years in the NFL looks to be showing as Brian gets older. I really
do hope he has a healthy and productive 2005 season; however, I just
don’t see it happening. If he cannot shake the injuries and get off
to a hot start, we may see Langerhans playing full-time in left, or
even the much-awaited debut of Andy Marte.

Raul Mondesi
Mondesi is pretty much a lock to be the opening day
starter in right field. Then again, whether he is still there in
September remains to be seen. Everyone knows that Mondesi was
indeed a clubhouse cancer his last few seasons, and this horse has
been beaten to death this winter. His behavior last year in
Pittsburgh does not mean that he will behave similarly in Atlanta.
Bobby and Schuerholz have a history of taking a chance on guys who
everyone else has deemed “washed up” and finding a way to get a few
more productive years out of them. Mike Devereaux and Luis Polonia
in 1995 come to mind regarding key outfield reclamation projects.
Those who do not change their ways do not last long, as we saw in
Bobby Bonilla and Ken Caminiti.

The fact is, if Mondesi plays well he will stay in Atlanta and be
rewarded. If he does not perform, or returns to his days as a
cancer, he will be released or traded. Does Raul want to work hard,
be humbled, and work towards a team goal, or does he want to loaf,
bring down his teammates, and focus on individual goals? His
performance in 2005 will hinge heavily on the answer to this
question, of which neither you nor I know the answer.

Andruw Jones
Andruw likes to go after the first pitch and chases
some balls in the dirt, and those are big reasons why he hasn’t been
able to hit .300 consistently. Nevertheless, it’s hard to say
anything bad about a guy who is just 27 but has already hit 250
career home runs. We can look for Andruw to hit roughly .270 with 30
HR and 100 RBI once again in 2005. Oh and by the way, he has won
the last seven gold glove awards in CF.

This off-season all everyone heard was how great Carlos Beltran is,
and he did have a scintillating post-season. However, his career
stats are eerily similar to those of Andruw Jones, and Andruw hit
the ball just as well as Beltran did in the NLDS. Let us not forget
that Andruw was 10-19 (.526) with 2 HR and two doubles in the five
games against Houston. Andruw’s 162 game averages over 9 seasons of
.268-31-96 are not too far from Beltran’s .287-27-104 line over the
past seven seasons. There is an inexplicably large contingent of
Braves fans pushing for Andruw to be traded, saying he is overpaid.
Beltran received a seven year, $119 million deal from the Mets,
averaging out to $17 million a year, while Andruw’s $75 million,
6-year deal averages to just $12.5 million. Yes this is a lot of
money, but in my opinion, Andruw’s contract is reasonably priced for
his offensive consistency and defensive wizardry. Atlanta will not
find a comparable player for the same kind of money on the free
agent market, that’s for sure.

Billy McCarthy
McCarthy, a former Rutgers OF, killed the ball in
Richmond after a mid-season move from Greenville. He hit .354 with a
.946 OPS at Richmond. For the season as a whole, he hit .324 with
15 homers. At 6-feet-2, 200 pounds he is a projectable
major-leaguer. However, he has one more year of minor-league
options available, and would really have to impress this spring to
make the big club. I have talked to several of his teammates, and
they all say one thing- the guy can flat out hit.

Ryan Langerhans
2004 was a banner year for “Langy”. Ryan
established career highs in batting average (.298), 2B (34), HR
(20), RBI (72), R (103), and BB (70). On top of this, he is an
excellent defensive outfielder with a plus arm. Remember, he was
held in much higher regard that Charles Thomas, prior to Thomas’
breakout 2004 campaign. Langy was recently signed to a MLB contract
at the league minimum, ensuring his place in Atlanta for 2005.
Given the Braves history of breaking in rookies slowly, Bobby Cox
would ideally like to platoon the left-handed hitting Langerhans
with the right-handed hitting Brian Jordan in left field. However,
if Jordan fails to produce I think Ryan is good enough to produce
better than replacement level numbers in 2005.

Onil Joseph
Playing in historically pitcher-friendly Myrtle Beach,
Joseph posted excellent numbers in 2004. His .272 average and 32-42
stolen base rate shot him up the list of Braves prospects. I’m not
sure how much stock can be put into his average though, as only 16
of his 115 hits went for extra bases. He is not a power hitter by
trade, but a speed guy without much pop should be able to leg out
the occasional double or triple, something he did not do in 2004.
Also, if his age is correct, he was still 22 playing in A ball, and
is older than Francoeur and almost exactly the same age as Kelly
Johnson (Joseph is 10 days older). Johnson has already proven that
he can hit AA pitching, something Onil will have to prove this year
in Mississippi if he is to continue to rise in the Atlanta system.