Nelson still Cruzing
I gotcher Safeco Field Curse right here, baby

.

Nelson Cruz sits at +4.25 wins added (WPA), above an average ML player (2.0 WAR in 2015) such as Kurt Suzuki, Brian McCann or David Freese.  In that sense, Cruz has been worth +5 WAR in the first half of the season.

In second place, in the AL, sits Jason Kipnis with +2.94 wins added.  Personally, I enjoy the fact that the first integer is 4 with Cruz and 2 with the second guy.  :- )  But if Cruz were to sit down right now, he would have pretty well justified his salary for this year and next.  And still we'd be able to play somebody else in his position, and gain the bases that player provided.

....

Many will enjoy re-reading this pre-season article Saying No to Nelson Cruz, which link will not annoy anybody at LL since as far as Dr. D can tell, nobody at LL is aware of SSI's existence.  It's by one of their best writers, and everybody gets things wrong sometimes -- Dr. D recommended signing Josh Hamilton, as did the Angels' GM.  What's cool are the types of comments in the Saying No thread:

....

This feels like when a kid is going to do something bad in front of their parent. The parent just watches thinking no, he won’t do it… As the kid rips down the entire shelf at the grocery store. Jack Z is being that kid. And the shelf is a 4 year 60 million dollar contract for Nelson Cruz with a 5th vesting year based upon level of [stink].

-or-

Now the analytic team for the Mariners can present this article to Jack, and put an end to the teeter-tottering.

....

Three or four years ago, it was routine for USSM and LL to characterize signings as "correct" or "incorrect."  It was also routine to characterize saberdweebs as holding the keys to the Kingdom of Correct.  A re-read of the preseason arguments on Cruz really locks in the idea that life is complex, and it isn't often that we should think in terms of "correct" and "incorrect."

Three or four years on -- that's today -- the Seattle blog-o-sphere is deliciously more circumspect about absolutes.  Our community is glad to have led the charge on this front.

But it's still interesting that a Google search turns up -zero- Lookout Landing articles on Cruz since April 10th.  Other than a brief one chuckling about a dislocated hip bone.  :: crickets ::

;- )

....

The other day, Cruz hit his 20th home run into the very front row of the PETCO bleachers, a piddling 351 feet.  Analysts this winter will characterize it as lucky.

But if you saw the TV broadcast, you saw Blowers open-mouthed over the majesty of the blast.  ESPN's Home Run Tracker gives the apex of that shot as 150 feet in the air.  150 feet!  Are there any buildings in your area 15 stories tall?  Get an image of some building you know of, with an elevator that has 15* buttons.

Can you imagine putting a building like that behind third base, and then watching a baseball player hit a ball over the top of that building, and over the fence behind the left fielder?  When pitchers try to jam Nelson Cruz they are playing with fire, baby.  If he gets the bat head out in front, they're going to look pretty bad on SportsCenter.  That was a fastball right on the inside black, right at the top of the zone, absolutely perfect jam pitch.  Cruz has hit three or four prodigous blasts off pitches like that.  So much for a "loopy" swing that doesn't get on top of the ball.

Here is the MLB.com video if you want to re-enjoy.  :- )  Would somebody please stopwatch the hang time?

....

Cruz had a slow June (.323 OBP not bad, .307 SLG bad, 1 HR) ... compared to his .650 SLG in the first two months it looked like somethin' brown and unpleasant.  But!  His K:BB was actually much better, 0.50 in June vs 0.33 in April and May.  He wasn't going to hit 85 home runs this year, but he was going to hit more home runs than we got from our 2014 DH's, that number being 14.  His WAR was going to be better than ours was last year, as Gordon has pointed out; last year our DH's got -2.2 WAR.

Maybe he's heating back up.  The last week he is .303/.362/.565, and the last two weeks he's .270/.360/.470.  Gotta love his on-base percentage, .367 on the year.

I dunno.  The takeaway for me here was ... Cruz a "bad fit" for this team?  No way no how.  You can complain about power, about SLG vs OBP, about Zduriencik, but you weren't going to be sorry about adding the ML home run leader in a position where you had -10 WAR the last ten years.

.....

You'd probably noticed that Kendrys Morales was doing okay in the All-Star voting; he is hitting almost exactly his career slash line of .270/.330/.460.  But had you noticed that Justin Smoak is batting .261/.336/.513?  The Jays are platooning him as a lefty hitter, although as a RHB he has a .909 SLG.  Thought I remembered righty as being his natural side, but then again you know about senility and recent memories.

Heh,

Dr D

Blog: 

Comments

1

UZR continues to claim Nelson Cruz is one of the worst defenders in ML baseball, but many of those who watch the games see him as average/acceptable.  I was curious and procrastinating, so I went to fangraphs and the web to figure the situation out.  The end result? I think it is safe to say UZR is useless and Inside Edge says Nelson Cruz is an average RF.  If you care how I came to that conclusion read onward.

+++++++++++++++

First of all, UZR claims Nelson Cruz range has cost the M's 7.3 runs compared to an average RF in 44 games worth of innings in RF.  Note, this is just the cost due to his range and does not include throwing arm and error deficiencies. 

That seems like a lot of runs in 44 games even for a bad fielder, so I started to wonder how many missed catches this represents.  My understanding is that UZR uses the average run value for a fly ball to get an estimate of the cost of a misplayed ball, but I could be wrong.  I read up on UZR and found that they assign a 0.83 run difference between catching or not catching a ball hit in the air to the outfield.  On aggregate, this would mean that Nelson Cruz missed 9 balls in play compared to the average RF in just 44 games, or a catch every 5 games.

Fortunately, fangraphs also has their Inside Edge fielding data where the each play is binned by the likelihood that a ML fielder would make the play, where the bins are 90-100%, 60-90%, 40-60%, 10-40%, 1-10%, and 0%.  Taking out the 18 balls in play deemed impossible to catch (the 0% bin), Nelson Cruz has had 104 playable balls hit his way and made 90 catches.  So we are only talking about 14 balls he had a chance to catch, but did not do so, according to Inside Edge.

The additional aspect of Inside Edge that is fun is that I can find the actual average performance for RF in 2014 on balls in each zone and use this performance to predict how many plays this mythical average RF would have made if they had been standing in RF for the M's instead of Nelson Cruz.  The answer? 90.8 catches, 0.8 plays better than Nelson Cruz at a value of 2/3 of a run.  My guess is most of you gave up on UZR a long time ago, but it is fun to put the truth to a common misperception; there is no evidence that Nelson Cruz is a liability in the outfield.

2

and got sneered at by the groupthinktank.  Players like Cruz are worth a whale of a lot precisely because they CAN do what Cruz just did in the first half -- prop up an offense singlehanded.

Amazing that he's got a real chance to end  up as a free agent BARGAIN -- aren't those what the LL crowd constantly promotes as the key to building a winning roster?

Add comment

Filtered HTML

  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <blockquote> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd><p><br>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

shout_filter

  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <blockquote> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.