50 replies to this topic

[The King Maker]

As I was mentioning in the "Mets land Bay" thread, saber metrically, Gardner outproduced Ellsbury last year, while playing about 1/3rd of the time (The gap in WAR would rise between the two, if Gardner played similarly for more at bats than he did last year).  

Gardner had 284 Plate Appearances,  while Ellsbury had 693.  (693/284= 2.44)

So, lets take last year's stats for Gardner and multiply it by 2.44.  I'll say his stat, then the multiplied stat (shown as Gardner Est.) and then Ellsbury's stats for the counting stats.

Batting Average:  

Gardner: .270  and Ellsbury at .301

OBP:  Gardner:  .345 and Ellsbury at .355

Doubles:

Gardner:  6,  Gardner Est.: 15 (14.6 really), and Ellsbury:  27

Triples:

Gardner:  6,  Gardner Est.: 15 (same as above), and Ellsbury: 10

HRs

Gardner:  3, Gardner Est:  7 (7.32) and Ellsbury at: 8

SBs:  

Gardner at 26, Gardner Est.: 63 and Ellsbury at 70

Runs:

Gardner:  48,  Gardner Est.:  117 and Ellsbury at: 94

RBI:

Gardner:  23, Gardner Est.:  56 and Ellsbury at:  60

BB/K ratio:

Gardner:  0.65 and Ellsbury at 0.66

LD%:

Gardner:  18.1% and Ellsbury at:  17.7%

BABIP:

Gardner: .312 and Ellsbury at .332

Plate Discipline:  

Gardner swings at 17.2 percentage of balls outside of the zone, and makes contact with 75.5% of them
Ellsbury swings at 24.0 percentage of balls outside of the zone, and makes contact with 72.5% of them.  

Gardner swings at 50.7 percentage of balls inside of the zone, and makes contact with 91.9% of them.  
Ellsbury swings at 57.4 percentage of balls inside of the zone, and makes contact with 94.8% of them.  

.ISO

Gardner:  .109  and Ellsbury at .114.
____________________________________________________________

All of this is pointless if the Yankees get someone for LF.  If the Yankees go with Gardner in LF, could he be the poor man's version of Ellsbury?  He will have CF eligibilty in all leagues this year, and if he plays LF, he will have multiple position eligibility as well.  I also understand that Ellsbury is a leadoff hitter who will get more at bats than Gardner.  I'm not advocating that Gardner is as good, better than Ellsbury.  I'm advocating that if given the chance, he could be someone that provides as good of a value as Ellsbury while being drafted rounds and rounds after him, or atleast has the tool set to do so.  He could also play CF enough this year in late game situations (If Granderson is lifted against a tough lefty pitcher) that he maintains CF eligibility for next year as well for those in keeper leagues.  They both will be the same age, both have very good team's around them with circular lineups.  If the Yankees sign no one, neither will have major competition for the LF job as well.

[RotoRaysfan]

The King Maker, on Dec 30 2009, 03:46 AM, said:

As I was mentioning in the "Mets land Bay" thread, saber metrically, Gardner outproduced Ellsbury last year, while playing about 1/3rd of the time (The gap in WAR would rise between the two, if Gardner played similarly for more at bats than he did last year).  

Gardner had 284 Plate Appearances,  while Ellsbury had 693.  (693/284= 2.44)

So, lets take last year's stats for Gardner and multiply it by 2.44.  I'll say his stat, then the multiplied stat (shown as Gardner Est.) and then Ellsbury's stats for the counting stats.

Batting Average:  

Gardner: .270  and Ellsbury at .301

OBP:  Gardner:  .345 and Ellsbury at .355

Doubles:

Gardner:  6,  Gardner Est.: 15 (14.6 really), and Ellsbury:  27

Triples:

Gardner:  6,  Gardner Est.: 15 (same as above), and Ellsbury: 10

HRs

Gardner:  3, Gardner Est:  7 (7.32) and Ellsbury at: 8

SBs:  

Gardner at 26, Gardner Est.: 63 and Ellsbury at 70

Runs:

Gardner:  48,  Gardner Est.:  117 and Ellsbury at: 94

RBI:

Gardner:  23, Gardner Est.:  56 and Ellsbury at:  60

BB/K ratio:

Gardner:  0.65 and Ellsbury at 0.66

LD%:

Gardner:  18.1% and Ellsbury at:  17.7%

BABIP:

Gardner: .312 and Ellsbury at .332

Plate Discipline:  

Gardner swings at 17.2 percentage of balls outside of the zone, and makes contact with 75.5% of them
Ellsbury swings at 24.0 percentage of balls outside of the zone, and makes contact with 72.5% of them.  

Gardner swings at 50.7 percentage of balls inside of the zone, and makes contact with 91.9% of them.  
Ellsbury swings at 57.4 percentage of balls inside of the zone, and makes contact with 94.8% of them.  

.ISO

Gardner:  .109  and Ellsbury at .114.
____________________________________________________________

All of this is pointless if the Yankees get someone for LF.  If the Yankees go with Gardner in LF, could he be the poor man's version of Ellsbury?  He will have CF eligibilty in all leagues this year, and if he plays LF, he will have multiple position eligibility as well.  I also understand that Ellsbury is a leadoff hitter who will get more at bats than Gardner.  I'm not advocating that Gardner is as good, better than Ellsbury.  I'm advocating that if given the chance, he could be someone that provides as good of a value as Ellsbury while being drafted rounds and rounds after him, or atleast has the tool set to do so.  He could also play CF enough this year in late game situations (If Granderson is lifted against a tough lefty pitcher) that he maintains CF eligibility for next year as well for those in keeper leagues.  They both will be the same age, both have very good team's around them with circular lineups.  If the Yankees sign no one, neither will have major competition for the LF job as well.

As you mentioned in the other thread, there are several flaws in the assumptions being made by simply increasing Gardner's value from a half-season or less and projecting his value, including:

1.  He was presumably played part-time vs. RHP, or the best matchups (and LHP's likely only in dire need - pinch-runner coming up to hit again in late games, or injury scratches).  Unless his vs. LHP splits were the same, it's easy to see more PT would reduce his production.  
2.  More PT leads to more opportunities - but it also leads to more dings & nicks - and in the case of speedsters, often leads to an overall downturn in SB production (it doesn't match the pace of a half-season or less).
3.  Finally, and most importantly, even in a great Yankees lineup, assuming 550+ PA's for anyone who will be at the bottom of a lineup is optimisitic (even in that loaded lineup, he'd have to be in perfect health and start 140+ games).

I realize the point of the thread is to highlight his potential relative value, and that's fair - he will go at the endgame of most drafts, and the opportunity is by no means certain (which you acknowledge).  I think a more realistic projection IF (and that's a *huge* IF) he gets the lion's share of PT would be closer to 450 PA's (sits against LHP's), and 30-40 SB's as the ceiling - and that's a final important distinction that you have alluded to.  Even if we project increased PA's, the ceiling is still that much lower with Gardner than Ellsbury FBB-wise (and hence the comments that no one would dream of trading Ellsbury for Gardner).

He's an intriguing late-game play if you need SB's and could benefit from the NYY home park boost & lineup, but as alluded to opportunity is by no means guaranteed...and the best-case ceiling is lower IMO for the aforementioned reasons.

[zothound1]

The King Maker, on Dec 30 2009, 03:46 AM, said:

As I was mentioning in the "Mets land Bay" thread, saber metrically, Gardner outproduced Ellsbury last year, while playing about 1/3rd of the time (The gap in WAR would rise between the two, if Gardner played similarly for more at bats than he did last year).

Gardner had 284 Plate Appearances, while Ellsbury had 693. (693/284= 2.44)

So, lets take last year's stats for Gardner and multiply it by 2.44. I'll say his stat, then the multiplied stat (shown as Gardner Est.) and then Ellsbury's stats for the counting stats.

Batting Average:

Gardner: .270 and Ellsbury at .301

OBP: Gardner: .345 and Ellsbury at .355

Doubles:

Gardner: 6, Gardner Est.: 15 (14.6 really), and Ellsbury: 27

Triples:

Gardner: 6, Gardner Est.: 15 (same as above), and Ellsbury: 10

HRs

Gardner: 3, Gardner Est: 7 (7.32) and Ellsbury at: 8

SBs:

Gardner at 26, Gardner Est.: 63 and Ellsbury at 70

Runs:

Gardner: 48, Gardner Est.: 117 and Ellsbury at: 94

RBI:

Gardner: 23, Gardner Est.: 56 and Ellsbury at: 60

BB/K ratio:

Gardner: 0.65 and Ellsbury at 0.66

LD%:

Gardner: 18.1% and Ellsbury at: 17.7%

BABIP:

Gardner: .312 and Ellsbury at .332

Plate Discipline:

Gardner swings at 17.2 percentage of balls outside of the zone, and makes contact with 75.5% of them
Ellsbury swings at 24.0 percentage of balls outside of the zone, and makes contact with 72.5% of them.

Gardner swings at 50.7 percentage of balls inside of the zone, and makes contact with 91.9% of them.
Ellsbury swings at 57.4 percentage of balls inside of the zone, and makes contact with 94.8% of them.

.ISO

Gardner: .109 and Ellsbury at .114.
____________________________________________________________

All of this is pointless if the Yankees get someone for LF. If the Yankees go with Gardner in LF, could he be the poor man's version of Ellsbury? He will have CF eligibilty in all leagues this year, and if he plays LF, he will have multiple position eligibility as well. I also understand that Ellsbury is a leadoff hitter who will get more at bats than Gardner. I'm not advocating that Gardner is as good, better than Ellsbury. I'm advocating that if given the chance, he could be someone that provides as good of a value as Ellsbury while being drafted rounds and rounds after him, or atleast has the tool set to do so. He could also play CF enough this year in late game situations (If Granderson is lifted against a tough lefty pitcher) that he maintains CF eligibility for next year as well for those in keeper leagues. They both will be the same age, both have very good team's around them with circular lineups. If the Yankees sign no one, neither will have major competition for the LF job as well.

wow.  talk about taking the fun out of baseball statistics.  (yawn)

[mcmastro]

Of course he is not a sure-fire thing, but since he won't be hitting lead-off, that should increase his chance for RBI's.  At the same time, some of those stolen bases came from pinch running, which will probably decrease unless he is able to keep his line around .280 (hitting lefties included).  

If fantasy owners are lucky, he'll hit in the 9 hole and have the top of lineup to hit him in.  Then again, when you think about it, the top 8 hitters in the Yankees line-up would be middle of the lineup hitters almost anywhere else.

[Luckynines]

Is Gardner even a starter?

[Thespis721]

Luckynines, on Dec 30 2009, 11:23 AM, said:

Is Gardner even a starter?

Not right now.  However, with the loss of Damon and Melky.  We've got Granderson, Gardner, Swisher.  Nady MAY come back or Damon MAY come back.  I guess whoever's willing to take the 7MM/year deal.

[mcmastro]

You just listed three outfielder, he has to be the starter as of now, doesn't he?

[fantasymad]

Cheaper version yes, but we are probably talking discount rack at your local dollar store.

[Thespis721]

mcmastro, on Dec 30 2009, 12:49 PM, said:

You just listed three outfielder, he has to be the starter as of now, doesn't he?

I meant, he isn't listed as a starter.  I don't think we can change that status till the end of spring training.

[Thespis721]

ciderjack6, on Dec 30 2009, 01:37 PM, said:

extrapolating those 3 hrs to 7 over a full season is a tough sell

Especially considering that one was a lucky hook shot in Citi Field and the other two were inside the park home runs.  The guy has got NO power.

[mcmastro]

Thespis721, on Dec 30 2009, 12:52 PM, said:

I meant, he isn't listed as a starter.  I don't think we can change that status till the end of spring training.

Ah i see, I'm not sure what the Yankees plan to do if he comes in as the starter (facing lefties).   I think unless Nady or Damon are resigned, the Yankees will only go after a role player to fill an outfield slot.  I kind of hope the Yankees to play Gardner though, him and Granderson can cover a lot of ground, Swisher.. .not so much.

[dan]

This thread just reminds me that some will overpay for a one trick pony. The only category that Ellsbury will for sure provide above average production in 5x5 leagues is steals. You can throw in triples IF your league counts them and his average will likely either be neutral or a little above average but probably not by alot. He hasn't yet broke 100 runs and even if he reaches the projections I've seen so far (103-106 runs) I'm not sure that (and his steals/triples) would be enough to make up for homers and rbi where he'll be below average.

I'm in no way saying that he's a bad player or that he doesn't have a place on a fantasy baseball team. Just that it seems that some may overrate him a little. Here's an example to illustrate my point:

I was checking out the CBS Sports fantasy baseball message boards the other day and one thread caught my attention. I think the thread was titled "Wright vs Zimmerman" (for the 5th and last keeper spot). In a nutshell the owner was considering keeping Kemp, Kinsler, Justin Upton, and Ellsbury and was trying to decide between Wright and Ryan Zimmerman for the last keeper spot (with other players like Zobrist, Hamels, and Haren also available). But to me there isn't as much of a need to keep Ellsbury in that example if 4 of the 5 keepers could be Kemp, Kinsler, Upton, and Wright. It seemed like the sentiment was (at least partly) that since Ellsbury was ranked highly by CBS (or anyone) that should play into the decision.

Imo, Ellsbury is a better fit on a team where he can be matched with someone like Ryan Howard or Adam Dunn. If you're already in good shape in the categories that Ellsbury helps the most in then passing on him isn't that big a deal. Especially when there are late round options (like Gardner) who can help provide some of the same production for a fraction of the price.

[The King Maker]

RotoRaysfan, on Dec 30 2009, 07:27 AM, said:

As you mentioned in the other thread, there are several flaws in the assumptions being made by simply increasing Gardner's value from a half-season or less and projecting his value, including:

1.  He was presumably played part-time vs. RHP, or the best matchups (and LHP's likely only in dire need - pinch-runner coming up to hit again in late games, or injury scratches).  Unless his vs. LHP splits were the same, it's easy to see more PT would reduce his production.  
2.  More PT leads to more opportunities - but it also leads to more dings & nicks - and in the case of speedsters, often leads to an overall downturn in SB production (it doesn't match the pace of a half-season or less).
3.  Finally, and most importantly, even in a great Yankees lineup, assuming 550+ PA's for anyone who will be at the bottom of a lineup is optimisitic (even in that loaded lineup, he'd have to be in perfect health and start 140+ games).

I realize the point of the thread is to highlight his potential relative value, and that's fair - he will go at the endgame of most drafts, and the opportunity is by no means certain (which you acknowledge).  I think a more realistic projection IF (and that's a *huge* IF) he gets the lion's share of PT would be closer to 450 PA's (sits against LHP's), and 30-40 SB's as the ceiling - and that's a final important distinction that you have alluded to.  Even if we project increased PA's, the ceiling is still that much lower with Gardner than Ellsbury FBB-wise (and hence the comments that no one would dream of trading Ellsbury for Gardner).

He's an intriguing late-game play if you need SB's and could benefit from the NYY home park boost & lineup, but as alluded to opportunity is by no means guaranteed...and the best-case ceiling is lower IMO for the aforementioned reasons.

Well yeah, I didn't mean this to say Gardner is on the same level as Ellsbury, I was just saying that they have a lot of similar skills.  Gardner carries way more risks just from the fact that the Yankees might sign someone else to play LF.  I'm making this thread with the assumption that if they don't sign anyone else he's as good as a bet to start in LF.  And his defense would be good enough that he could move to CF late in games if Granderson is taken out when facing a tough lefty.  

1.  His splits for last year, are somewhat reverse splits.  His line against right handed pitchers (.264/.335/.373) is bested by his line against left handed pitchers (.291/.381/.400) but in much fewer at bats.  2008, was the exact opposite.  I can't find the splits in his minor league career right now.  

2.  Well yeah injuries are a factor too, but if Gardner is prone to injury, then a speedster like Ellsbury should be as well.

3.  Yeah, I don't think he's going to get the 600 ABs that Ellsbury did last year, I was just using that to show their skill levels and numbers and how close they were.   I felt that because of the short playing time, one would assume Ellsbury had a much better year, when he really didn't, but the Yankees platooned Gardner with Melky because Melky got hot for some time and started hitting clutch hits.  With Melky gone, and as of right now, no one in LF, I think he could get a good amount of ABs.  

I think he would sit against lefties, if the Yankees signed someone like Reed Johnson.  But from my line of thinking, I see the Yankees having a Gardner/Granderson/Swisher OF.  If Granderson has to sit against a tough lefty, take Gardner out from LF, and put him in CF, and have Jamie Hoffman (good defense atleast) play LF.  If we are going to assume that the Yankees are facing a tough lefty, there is a chance that Granderson could sit some games as well, and the only one to start at center then would be Gardner. I was just saying their skill levels are atleast similar.  Its obviously a risk factor, but I'm also guessing that who ever is drafting is able to fill some other position of need at where Ellsbury is going, and then pick off Gardner late.

[The King Maker]

mcmastro, on Dec 30 2009, 10:44 AM, said:

Of course he is not a sure-fire thing, but since he won't be hitting lead-off, that should increase his chance for RBI's.  At the same time, some of those stolen bases came from pinch running, which will probably decrease unless he is able to keep his line around .280 (hitting lefties included).  

If fantasy owners are lucky, he'll hit in the 9 hole and have the top of lineup to hit him in.  Then again, when you think about it, the top 8 hitters in the Yankees line-up would be middle of the lineup hitters almost anywhere else.

Well yeah, thats what I meant with a circular lineup, where he'd have Jeter hitting behind him, Granderson (or Nick Johnson behind Jeter) and then Tex, A-Rod...

This is all based on the Yankees NOT signing anyone, if they do sign anyone else, obviously this goes out the window.  But I'm figuring they made the pick of Hoffman with the No. 1 pick, as the primary OF backup since scouting reports seem to indicate that he's a good fielder.  He won the CF job out of ST, and doing just fine until I believe he injured something, missed some time, and Melky got hot at the same time.  Then it turned into a platoon last year.

[The King Maker]

Luckynines, on Dec 30 2009, 12:23 PM, said:

Is Gardner even a starter?

Right now, Yes.  But if the Yankees resign Damon, or bring in someone like Reed Johnson (platoon) or Xavier Nady, then no.

[The King Maker]

dan, on Dec 30 2009, 03:27 PM, said:

This thread just reminds me that some will overpay for a one trick pony. The only category that Ellsbury will for sure provide above average production in 5x5 leagues is steals. You can throw in triples IF your league counts them and his average will likely either be neutral or a little above average but probably not by alot. He hasn't yet broke 100 runs and even if he reaches the projections I've seen so far (103-106 runs) I'm not sure that (and his steals/triples) would be enough to make up for homers and rbi where he'll be below average.

I'm in no way saying that he's a bad player or that he doesn't have a place on a fantasy baseball team. Just that it seems that some may overrate him a little. Here's an example to illustrate my point:

I was checking out the CBS Sports fantasy baseball message boards the other day and one thread caught my attention. I think the thread was titled "Wright vs Zimmerman" (for the 5th and last keeper spot). In a nutshell the owner was considering keeping Kemp, Kinsler, Justin Upton, and Ellsbury and was trying to decide between Wright and Ryan Zimmerman for the last keeper spot (with other players like Zobrist, Hamels, and Haren also available). But to me there isn't as much of a need to keep Ellsbury in that example if 4 of the 5 keepers could be Kemp, Kinsler, Upton, and Wright. It seemed like the sentiment was (at least partly) that since Ellsbury was ranked highly by CBS (or anyone) that should play into the decision.

Imo, Ellsbury is a better fit on a team where he can be matched with someone like Ryan Howard or Adam Dunn. If you're already in good shape in the categories that Ellsbury helps the most in then passing on him isn't that big a deal. Especially when there are late round options (like Gardner) who can help provide some of the same production for a fraction of the price.

Thanks.  Thats pretty much my point in this thread.  When draft time comes around, we should know if Gardner is the starter or not, and if he is, you could get someone like Gardner who have similar skill sets and surrounding casts later.  He's obviously more of a risk than Ellsbury, but you get much better at some other spot.  Using your example, I think a trade offer that says Zimmerman and Gardner for Ellsbury and say Gil Meche or someone near that value, that the person getting Zimmerman is getting much more value there (again, provided that Gardner is starting).

[Thespis721]

Okay.  I mean, if you have your draft and you already know that Gardner is going to be a starter (or even a platoon), he may be worth a late round pick up.  Like last round or second to last round in case he picks up.  But honestly, I highly doubt anyone is drafting him next year, starter or no, and you can probably pick him up out of FA.

Edit:  I'm referring to standard 12 team or less leagues.  If he's a starter and you're in a 16+ league, I can see him being taken in the late rounds.

Edited by Thespis721, 31 December 2009 - 09:01 AM.

[nycsoujah7]

you can't be serious. Ellsbury is a stud. Gardner is nothing more than a pinch runner.

[lavaman]

What are the chances that Gardner starts in that Yankee Outfield?