Examining The Shortstop Options

In 2013, with 1029 innings played, he had 6 DRS.

In 700 or so innings played in 2014, he had 7 DRS.  7 DRS in 700 or so innings.  Just last year.  This season, there are 5 shortstop with that many DRS.

THIS year he has dropped off.  One year isn't a trend.  Will he go back to double digit DRS as he moves farther away from 30, no?  But judging offense or defense or pitching on just one year (or in this case 80 or so games)?  How many times do we have to learn that lesson?

  On 7/22/2015 at 5:10 PM, Brock Beauchamp said:

Good catch on the partial seasons. I forgot to equate for that.

But either way, he's not the defensive player he was earlier in his career. It's likely he will become below average defensively relatively soon.

I'm not sure how soon that will be though. He turns 31 this year, not 36, 37. I don't think he's washed up at the position in a year or two as some suggest.  I think he'll be above average to average for the next four seasons at least and his offense will likely still be good too.  He doesn't have to be elite on both sides of the ball forever. He likely is very good for the short term and the next three, four years.

  On 7/22/2015 at 5:21 PM, Brock Beauchamp said:

I don't know when the decline phase will come either but it significantly raises the risk of the deal.

If 2015 Tulo is the Tulo going forward, he needs to hit better than Brian Dozier to sustain the greatness he had in years past. He isn't hitting that level offensively this season, either...

He has the talent to do it but each question mark raises the risk of the deal.

Well, the man had a 171 wRC+ just last year and 141 in 2013.  Additionally, there is still plenty of this season left, but I agree with you.  If he stays below 120 wRC+ and isn't saving runs, it's an issue.  

Of course, May was truly a horrendous month for him (wRC+ of 64.  Has he ever been that bad in a month?).  Now May counts for sure, but his wRC+ in June was in the 140s and in July it was in the 150s.  Much closer to the 170s he had last year and more like the historical Tulo.

  On 7/22/2015 at 5:39 PM, Brock Beauchamp said:

I don't really have any concerns about his bat. I think he's a .820, maybe .840 hitter in Target Field. That's pretty awesome.

My concerns revolve around defense and health. His health is an immediate concern but the defense should be fine for a year or two.

My major concerns revolve around 2017-2018. All one has to do is look at Joe Mauer or Albert Pujols previous to this year's Renaissance to see how badly things can go after 30.

I think it's important to realize that even superstars decline and that decline can come quickly indeed. It's easy to think that because they're great they'll continue to be great and slowly decline over the years but reality isn't that neat. There is a very real possibility that any player, superstars included, can crash and burn and do it in a hurry.

  On 7/22/2015 at 5:39 PM, Brock Beauchamp said:

 All one has to do is look at Joe Mauer or Albert Pujols previous to this year's Renaissance to see how badly things can go after 30.

After 30?  So, basically, never sign a quality FA?  Nor should one trade for a great player at 30 or older? We should just assume that since there are a examples of players dropping off it will happen to every player? One could look at many other players and not see such a dropoff at that age 30.  He has 5 more seasons on his contract., not 9, 10. He'd be 35 when the 2020 regular season ends.  Hardly over the hill with one foot in the grave. 

  On 7/22/2015 at 5:46 PM, Oxtung said:

I think it's important to realize that even superstars decline and that decline can come quickly indeed. It's easy to think that because they're great they'll continue to be great and slowly decline over the years but reality isn't that neat. There is a very real possibility that any player, superstars included, can crash and burn and do it in a hurry.

That's pretty much asking a team to be as conservative as possible because the team is more scared to take a chance than reap the benefits of taking a chance. He has five seasons left on his contract.  Still 35 (barely) when his contract ends unless we are in the playoffs in 2020.

  On 7/22/2015 at 5:51 PM, Brock Beauchamp said:

No, but he's not unlike Mauer in that his value drops like a stone the moment he can no longer play a premium position. Not to mention that it creates positional issues on a team that already has Joe Mauer on it.

And that's a real risk for a shortstop signed through his age 35 season. His bat should carry to another position but it won't carry particularly well unless he stays over .800 and I'm not sure that's a reasonable expectation.

Why do you think it's unreasonable to expect he maintain an OPS over .800 through age 35? I don't get that argument. I mean, I don't see a defender like Tulo needing to move off shortstop at 33, 34 or 35 either.  This isn't a guy who has been poor on defense most of his career like Jeter who looked even worse as he approached 40.  This guy has been a quality defender for years and is 30.  He has a long way to go to be bad enough to move him off the position.

But back to the OPS thing, I really don't get the notion a hitter like him couldn't maintain a .800 OPS. in 5 of his last 7 seasons, his OPS has been over .900. Chipper lead the league in OPS at 35.

Tulo's OPS in 2013: .931

Tulo's OPS in 2014: 1.035

This year:

Tulo's OPS in Mar/Apr: .847

Tulo's OPS in June: .965

Tulo's OPS in July: .948

Tulo's May OPS in May .677

I'm not concerned about that one month.  I don't think it's indicative of his talent.

  On 7/23/2015 at 1:23 AM, TheLeviathan said:

I love the "Let's conveniently forget a guy's worst month" game!  

 

Do we get to play it with Gibson too?

Sure, as soon as Gibson has been a stud for a decade like Tulo has we can consider that.  Here's hoping that happens even one season in his career.  Remember, he's only got two full seasons (2016 and 2017) before he's over the hill (30) so he's running out of time.

BTW, Tulo easily has the best OPS of any shortstop in baseball...even with May (which I didn't forget I just said I don't put much weight in it considering a ton of history and what he's done the other months). Does Gibson have that same track record in the majors where we can really put aside a month and say that's not him? Yeah, no...

  On 7/23/2015 at 1:41 AM, TheLeviathan said:

Thing is - I don't disagree with your point about Tulo, that month appears to be an outlier that is unfairly making it look like a dip post-injury.  Just like looking at the last three months of Gibson (which have been very similar in production) is a much more fair way of analyzing his performance as well. What is fair for the goose, should be fair for the gander.

No, not really.  The goose and gander in the scenario couldn't be more far apart in regards to proven talent over a long period of time. Gibson hasn't played enough in the majors to give him the benefit of the doubt.  If he had even two, three season in the majors as being a stud and then a bad start this season followed by a recovery, maybe. That's not the case.  He has never even had one season where he's been close to being a stud and he's almost 28 already.

Benefits of the doubt can't be applied evenly across the board. Some have earned it, some haven't.  Tulo has, Gibson hasn't.

  On 7/23/2015 at 1:56 AM, TheLeviathan said:

He can't control when he was brought up, I would imagine he (like many of us) thought he should've come up sooner.  So let's stop using his age against him, that isn't what it's about.

 

Young (read: new to the league) players grow and adapt all the time and positive steps of development should be noted and appreciated as they become consistent.  Gibson, like many before him, has worked to make himself better against MLB competition and seems to have found a pretty consistent niche the last three months.  Insisting on including a month that stands out as a pretty significant outlier in order to make your point seems more than a bit disingenuous.  

You know, this is the third time in the last two days you've decided to put a label on my argument to try and discredit it. Gets a little old...

So, I can't use Gibson's age against him, but you can use Tulo's age against him. Seems disingenuous. I guess goose and gander don't apply here. Age (and experience) IS actually relevant here. Most pitchers are who they are at his age. 

There's nothing disingenuous about the point I'm making.  He doesn't have the history in the majors to put aside any stats yet, or at least give him the same benefit of the doubt you give to a player who has close to a decade of info to look at.  Anyone who does statistical analysis will tell you that and will also tell you you can't apply the same benefit of the doubt to a player who has been a stud for almost a decade to a pitcher who hasn't even had two full seasons in the majors yet and has NEVER been a stud.

  On 7/23/2015 at 2:23 AM, TheLeviathan said:

 The problem is that you're justifying the omission of Tulo's worst month based on his career history (justifiable) but refusing to acknowledge the omission of Gibson's worst month based on his continued development as a player.  (also justifiable)

Age (and experience) IS actually relevant here. If he had more history of being a stud, I'd shake that month off.  He doesn't. Most pitchers are who they are at his age. If he was in his early 20's I would agree with the development part, but he's not. How much more do MOST pitchers develop at 28? You really believe he's a stud in the making?

I am not faulting him, Brock.  This isn't attack Gibson time.  This is evaluating the player we have.  He has 60 career starts. Yes he is 27, turns 28 this calendar year, so his next full season he will be? Most pitchers are who they are at his age.

He has 60 career starts, an ERA of 4.33, a FIP of 4.03.  He has 3.3 WAR. He Ks less than 6 per 9.  There is nothing that screams this guy will be any more than average.  I don't like saying that.  I want all of our guys to be studs, but it's not happening with him.

  On 7/23/2015 at 2:34 AM, TheLeviathan said:

No, you seem to be misunderstanding that I want to place Gibson at anywhere near the level of Tulowitski.  Tulowitski has been and is an elite player.  Gibson appears to be trending towards an above average starter.  (Minus his May he's a top 30 picher in all of baseball in xFIP, ERA, and a variety of other meaningful statistics.  And even with his bad May he's a in the top 50 in many of these - making him a solidly entrenched #2 starter by many measures)

 

I just believe it's fair that if you're going to evaluate Gibson's value now and in the future that it's worthwhile to note he's been a far better pitcher the last three months than his cumulative numbers would indicate.

 

Much like it's fair for you to point out that any trend downward by Tulo is largely just a one month blip rather than a substantive decline.

I am cautiously optimistic that Gibson has turned a corner, I certainly want that to be the case, but that doesn't mean based on everything I've written, that I feel compelled to discard any info in Gibson due to having so little to use to begin with.  What do we do with his last start?