Do the best you can until you know better. Then when you know better, do better.
This Maya Angelou quote is often used as one of those “how to live your life” mantras. Turns out we can apply it to our little corner of the world as sports fans, too. The greybeards among us grew up in a time period when we were told that there were certain stats that were better than others to determine who the best players in the game were. And we both learned and applied those lessons.
We were doing the best we could.
But in the last 40 years, there’s been a ton of advances in understanding what makes for a good MLB player. Some fans and organizations embraced these changes. Some were eventually pulled along. And some still refuse to adapt. My guess is that this is no different when it comes to baseball evaluation than it is with any other field you can imagine.
Back around the time that the revolution in baseball statistics was gaining traction, there was an article in Scientific American about N-Rays. If you’ve never heard of N-Rays, don’t worry, you’re not really missing anything. The Wikipedia entry on N-Rays defines them as this:
were a hypothesized form of radiation, described by French physicist Prosper-René Blondlot in 1903, and initially confirmed by others, but subsequently found to be illusory.
Unfortunately, the article is beyond a paywall, so the conclusion of the article will have to be summarized, rather than attributing with an exact quote. If memory serves, the article closed with a scientist saying words to the effect of, “We used to believe in X but then all of the people who believed in X died. Now we believe in Y.”
Sometimes that’s what it takes for new ideas to completely take over, for the people who hold on so dearly to the old ways to simply no longer be alive. It’s impossible to imagine that in 50 years there will be anyone who thinks that one of the best ways to evaluate batters will be to look at AVG or to evaluate pitchers will be to look at Wins.
Right now, the best way we have to rate players is WAR. Some out there will jump up and down, throw a tantrum, hold their breath and claim that this made-up stat is the equivalent of N-Rays – illusory. As if every ratio stat like AVG or OBP or SLG or ERA or WHIP isn’t made up.
My sincere hope is that in 50 years, we’ll have a better way to measure a player’s value than the current iteration of WAR. And my further hope is that any of you reading this that will still be alive 50 years in the future will embrace the new ways of looking at the game. Simply, when you know better, do better.
All of this was an introduction to something that caught my eye this morning. And that is that Pete Alonso has a 2.7 fWAR while Jeff McNeil has a 2.6 fWAR. It’s almost impossible to believe that the guy with 45 HR is no more valuable than the guy with a .076 ISO on August 4th. But it’s just an example that there are different ways to accumulate value and that while some value is obvious, others are a bit more under the surface.
Most Mets fans hold Alonso in high regard. He’s a homegrown player who gives great effort and is a major source of power, particularly home runs. There’s a lot to love in that sentence. But Alonso makes a lot of outs, is below average on the basepaths and plays the least valuable position in the field. Those things matter, too, even if they get overshadowed by 450-foot homers.
Two of the top five players in the NL play first base. Matt Olson has a 6.2 fWAR, while Freddie Freeman has a 7.4 mark. Even though they play the least valuable position like Alonso, they still have managed to put up MVP-type seasons. They both are good baserunners, they both make fewer outs, Olson has 16 more XBH than Alonso while Freeman has 19 more. They simply bring more production to the table. They’re proof you can play 1B and still be quite valuable.
Of course, one of the things that is implied here is that value is agnostic. People will say that when the season was in the balance that McNeil was floundering and that he’s provided his value when the team had already waved the white flag on the season. And that’s true. If McNeil hit like he did in his last 190-something PA back in, say, June – that it would have been more valuable to the team.
But Alonso had a .152/.222/.364 line in June, so let’s not pretend he wasn’t a huge part of the problem for the team’s poor record that month. Additionally, when we compare how a player does in clutch, high-leverage situations compared to how he does overall, McNeil is easily the best player on the team, while Alonso is in negative numbers.
It can be hard for fans to remove specific situations from their internal calculations. And it’s not terrible if you want to look at those type of events. It’s just that you need to apply them equally. You can’t just remember the dozen times that Wilmer Flores delivered a big hit and forget the hundreds of times he failed in the same situations.
The greybeards were told that some players were just clutch, that they performed better in the big situations. But the reality is that a player’s ability in the clutch is something that varies highly from year to year for all players. David Wright had the following Clutch scores from 2006-2011: 1.81, (-0.62), (-1.01), 0.60, (-0.85), 0.77 – was he clutch? Most people would say yes but it really depended on the year.
It’s extremely valuable when you hit a grand slam in the bottom of the ninth when your team trails by three runs. It’s just not something that can be counted on happening in the future just because a player did it once. You get much more consistency when you focus on all situations, regardless of context. And while McNeil didn’t hit early in the year, we don’t punish him for that. It’s just as likely to be a random thing as it is to have any significance whatsoever.
Using our greatest sample size of the full season and using our most advanced value metric in WAR, Alonso and McNeil contributed equally to the Mets’ on-field wins here in 2023. Of course, it’s a drop of 3.1 fWAR from what McNeil gave the club last year (as of games of 9/23) compared to a drop of 1.1 fWAR for Alonso. Neither player should feel great about their performance this season.
Pete with 45 HR, 115 RBI and a 124 OPS+
I’ll take those base numbers any day for a power hitter.
Down year for both, but the total lack of the thing that defines McNeil makes me thing his season was worse.
If Alonso is not in the lineup, who drives in 110+ runs?
RBIs have a lot to do with your teammates. Alonso has batted with 420 runners on base, tied for the 15th-most of any player in MLB. So, how productive was Alonso? His percentage of those runners driven in is 16.67, which is tied for the 66th-best mark. Who was he tied with> Those big RBI guys Gabriel Moreno and Mickey Moniak.
Of course, Alonso has the edge with 45 HR. But then you have to ask if his replacement in the lineup could make up for that with hits where Alonso made outs and with getting on base so that guys behind him could drive him in. So, maybe the Mets replace Alonso’s 115 RBIs with 90 from their replacement and 25 with times that the replacement is driven in when Alonso wasn’t. Or whatever combination you want to create.
Sounds like a good reason to trade him. Lol
Olson is hitting .278 with 162 hits and 101 walks. Freeman us hitting .334 with 203 hits and 70 walks. Pete is hitting .218 with 118 hits and 65 walks. So let’s revert for a moment to batting average and it’s simple to see how much stronger these two were that Alonso. Pete’s RBI total is impacted both by his lack of getting hits and that who ever hit 2 and 3 in front of him did not get on base enough. If you remember the great seasons Don Mattingly had, part of that was Rivers and Randolph setting the table. He would get at or ver 200 hits and hit .325 or better.
I like McNeil and his versatility. His value is a table setter and for a lot of this season he did not do his job, regardless of how the season in its totality end up. 45 HR and 115 RBI players are rare. Pete has more value on this team. First firings should be the hitting coach and Hefner. No excuse for how bad the pitching was Hefner rarely turned a pitcher around.
Thanks Brian for the reality check on Pete Alonso. I’m glad you pointed out his 16.67 (66th) best mark of driving in runs. My sincere wish is that the Mets do not sign him to a long term contract this off season. I’m a believer that Vientos will be the heir apparent after the trade deadline in 2024. If Pete is having a great comeback year, then it’s good for the team, and gives him a higher value for what we will need. In fact, if Vientos and Alonso both have a good spring training, then I would deal him for pitching. (Notice how tepid was the response by other teams for Alonso this last trade deadline?)
I do see Vientos having 25-30 Homers and 90+ RBI’s if the Mets actually play him as a DH or at 1B. We know he has a history of starting slow (in all levels of his professional career), but he is a hitter. The Met’s should not pay or overpay for Alonso’s numbers and impact on the lineup. We all know that the Braves would be dumping Alonso; given the same situation, and using the money to buy parts or sign their their talented youth.*
And yes, even in his down year, McNeil is more valuable then Alonso.
* The Braves are younger and have a payroll that makes sense. I will say though, that they have been lucky with their pitching staff, as much as the Mets have been unlucky.
Alonso is having a better year than McNeil because Alonso had 3 months that he was better than usual and 2 months just below is normal. McNeil had 3 months that he is better than usual and 3 months that he was really bad. When he was good he was really good and when he was bad he was very bad. He was inconsistent this year. That is why the total fWar is similar for the two players. ( BR >split >tOPS+ for each player).
Mike W > how about free agent Jeimer Candelario (1B) and Lordes Gurriel Jr (LF) at the similar price as Alsono.
Brian > 16.67%, excellent response
Sure I’ll take Candelario and Gurriel. And that leaves us with Alonso to trade for a starting pitcher that we desperately need.
Brian,
Nice article, stimulates thought as usual. Similar to the Kyle Schwarber vs others dialogue not long ago.
Physicist Max Planck is attributed with a similar quote along the lines of science advances the most at funerals.
I still can’t go with Cahna and his 2.5 bWAR over Schwarber and his 0.5 bWAR. Ditto with Pete over McNeil. While I’m a gray beard, I am a proponent of the modern stats as clearly superior to the traditional ones we grew up with. All these big league teams with their Ivy League executives have WAR and much more data at their disposal. They still pay more to the Schwarbers and Alonsos, and pitchers pitch around the Schwarbers and Alonsos much more often than the Cahnas and McNeils.
We Met fans tend to overrate him based on the HR, as comps to Olsen and Freeman easily display. However, while I love the versatility of McNeil’s game, 50 HR power, even with the Ks, fielding, and baserunning limitations. It seems the BABIP has hurt Pete’s numbers this year.
Agreed on Schwarber over Canha. And Alonso over McNeil. While I’m a fan of bWAR, its limits are apparent when valuing Cahna as 5x the player as Schwarber. WAR usually subtracts points from 1B just by playing the position.
A doctor friend once told me that sometimes the test results don’t tell the whole story; you have to look at the patient in front of you. Looking at Alonso and McNeil, a .220 HR hitter is more valuable than a .275 slap hitter.
Didn’t you write a similar column about Schwarber?
If we look up offensive fWAR only, Nimmo is ranked #25 in MLB, the top Mets ranking. Lindor is #32; Alonso is #52 and ironically, Schwarber is 53rd. Know who is ranked 44th in MLB? My buddy. Don’t say bad things about him. Wishing he was still a Met? I bet you do…
Alonso is a better player than McNeil this year, let’s not kid ourselves. Kind of brings to mind the conundrum I used to face in fantasy snake drafts: If you pick lower in the first round, do you take a good outfielder or first baseman to get numbers in the first two picks, or take the catcher and a shortstop knowing that the outfielders and first basemen will be available later? Seems like Fangraohs is saying to take the catcher and shortstop. Hard to believe those two have equal FWAR.
I like Alonso. I think he’s a winner and I like winners. He does work hard and we see that. McNeil doesn’t appear to, and that has been my take all year – well before Tommy Pham’s opinions came to light. I don’t know if I would give him more than 5 years, but I would keep Alonso next year. First, I don’t think the prospect return is what thee Mets need and second, he works hard. But, I’d rather bat him fifth.