A run is a run is a run. And there are lots of ways for baseball teams to score those runs or prevent their opponents from scoring them. No run saved or scored is any more valuable than any other run saved or scored.
But for some reason, a lot of Mets fans do not appreciate how Angel Pagan nets our team those runs. And to be honest, I do not understand the vigor with which some people denounce the Heavenly Heathen as a viable starter.
Those who have read my articles will know that I have a soft spot for fabulously named players, and Angel Pagan just might have the most ironic name I have ever come across. The Holy Heretic, the Pious Polytheist. The possibilities are endless! But I like to fancy myself a sabermetrician, and as a sabermetrician I have to let the numbers speak for themselves, no matter my personal feelings. In addition to laying out my case for the Divine Disbeliever (I swear, I’m done now), I will address the concerns voiced by the skeptical Mets fans and hopefully show why they should not be concerns at all (warning: I try to tackle a lot, so read at your leisure).
Offensively, Angel Pagan does not excel in any one area. He has roughly average control of the strike zone, with a slightly below-average walk rate and a slightly above average strikeout rate. His BB% was 6.6% in 2009 and 7.0 % in 2010, compared to major league averages of 8.5% and 8.9% in those years (all numbers from fangraphs.com). His K% was 16.3% in ‘09 and 16.8% in ‘10, compared to the big league averages of 20.3% and 20.7%. All told, his BB/K rate was just about average at .45 in both seasons, with the big-league rate sitting at .49 in ’09 and .46 in ’10. And Pagan’s career BB/KK rate? .45. In addition to his consistency, his swinging strike rate and contact percentage are both above-average, so there should not be concerns that the numbers will fall off going forward.
Pagan also exhibits top-notch speed, as he his 7.5 Speed Score ranks all the way up at 5th in the big leagues over the past two seasons. Combined with his solid line drive rates, 20.6% and 19.5% the last two years, Pagan has very good batting average on balls in play (BABIP). His BABIPs were .349 and .331 compared the league averages of just under .300. Unlike pitchers, batter exert a good deal of control over their BABIP, and Pagan’s numbers sit about exactly where you would expect them to given his underlying skills. His career .325 mark, which include his poor Chicago season, bears that out.
A good BABIP and low strikeout rate mean a high average, and Pagan has posted marks of .306 and .290 the last two seasons. His career average, again including his poor Chicago seasons, sits at .285, so an average around .285-.295 should be expected. Pagan’s good average gives him good overall on-base skills. He had a .346, .350, and .340 OBP the last three seasons, decently above the major-league average in the .325-.330 range.
While Pagan has shown remarkable consistency in his plate discipline and BABIPs, his power output has shown more variance. He had an above-average Isolated Power (slugging minus average, or extra bases per at bat) in ’09 at .187, but a below-average mark in ’10 at .135. The big-league average has been .155 and .145 the last two seasons, and Pagan’s career mark sits at .150. He does not knock a lot of balls out of the park (5.8 career HR/FB%), but he hits enough doubles and triples to keep that ISO respectable. If he can muster a .140 ISO he will put up a decent slugging percentage.
A reasonable triple slash projection is .290/.340/.430, almost identical to last season’s .290/.340/.425. An OPS of .770 would be decently above the major-league averages of .751 and .728 the last two years.
We also cannot forget Pagan’s skills on the base paths. Pagan swiped 37 bags last season and only got caught nine times for an 80% success rate (77% career mark). His speed also means he’ll be better than most at advancing to home once the ball is put in play. People often cite some of Pagan’s past bone-headed mistakes on the base paths, but they really should not be a concern. Pagan has ceased to make those sorts of mistakes recently, and even if he makes those stupid outs again, they just do not occur enough to significantly detract from his value. They might be painful for fans to watch, but those mistakes are much uglier than they are actually detrimental, no worse than a few extra times caught stealing.
All offense considered, Pagan should have a slightly above-average mark in all three triple slash categories, and he should be above average on the bases. His wOBA was .358 in ’09 and .340 in ’10, and, since his batting numbers should be remarkably similar to last season, a wOBA around that same .340 should be expected (wOBA, the all-inclusive offensive stat, is scaled to OBP, so between .325 and .330 is average). But I am of the belief that wOBA systematically undervalues base-running, so I would actually bump that number up a few points to about .345 (I have a few reasons for this belief, but this is not the time for that discussion). Over a full season of playing time (150 games), Pagan’s offense projects as about 10-15 runs above average, so we will call it 12.5. He will not put up sexy numbers in any one category, and I imagine that is where much of the distrust comes from. It is just easier to buy into 30 home runs or 50 steals, but as long as you give the production, I don’t care how unsexy you are.
And now we get to the one area in which Pagan is legitimately a sexy stud: defense. Pagan’s UZR/150 is excellent at all three outfield positions, and truly phenomenal in right. His career numbers: 13.5 UZR/150 in left, 8.6 in center, and 23.5(!) in right. These numbers came in almost 3,000 innings, a significant sample. And Defensive Runs Saved is even higher on Pagan. While UZR says Pagan has saved 26.6 runs over his career, DRS puts that number at 36. Scouts, analysts, and talking-heads agree and most rave about Pagan’s defense. His fantastic speed gives him great range, and his arm is quite good by all accounts. In right field I think it would be unfair to predict him saving anything worse than 10-15 runs, and we will stick with 12.5 runs for our projection (for reference, UZR had Pagan saving 15.1 runs in 2010, while DRS had him saving 14 runs, in the more difficult center field). And given how much room there is to cover in Citi’s cavernous right field, his range could have an even bigger effect.
As of now, I have Pagan producing 12.5 runs above average of both offense and defense. Right field, however, is one of the easier positions to play on the field, and we have to take that into account. The relative ease of the position is why there is such an expectation for big power numbers — like those of Jayson Werth, Andre Ethier, and Corey Hart — because you have to make up for the fact that you are not playing a premium defensive position. Luckily, we have data which tells us how many runs playing right field will hurt a player’s value. On average, a right fielder will produce about seven runs of excess offense compared to the average player over 150 games. So if we subtract those seven runs from his offensive projection, we see that Pagan is still about five runs above average for a right fielder. When you can slot in the Mets’ above-average power at center field, third base, and shortstop, it is perfectly acceptable to have below average power in right field.
With 12.5 runs of offensive value, 12.5 runs of defensive value, -7 runs of positional value, Pagan comes out to be 18 runs above average. It takes about 10 runs above average to win one extra game, so Pagan should give the Mets about two more wins than the average right fielder (if you want to convert his numbers to WAR, throw in about 22 runs of replacement value over 150 games, and you get a 4.0 WAR player). An average team with Pagan-quality players starting at all eight positions would win about 15 more games than average, or about 95 total.
I’m sure that the comment section will blow up saying there is no way that is the case. A team of Angel Pagans has no chance of being a playoff team! But I believe that is the folly of ignoring unsexy numbers. No, Pagan will not blow you away with any single offensive skill, but he will be good at all of them. He won’t give you tons of runs any one way, but he’ll give you a few runs every single way.
If you disagree, please show me where in my analysis I went wrong. We’re looking at the numbers here, and I just don’t see how the numbers can lead to any other conclusion. You might just be a disbeliever, which is fine, but you have to acknowledge that you are betting against the past. He did have a poor August and September, but it is poor sabermetric form to extrapolate from that small of a sample. He is neither as good as his first four months nor as poor as his final two. We look at all of the data together, and then we come to conclusions. Obviously, anything can happen, and Pagan’s production could fall off a cliff or vastly improve. I am not claiming to see into a crystal ball, but if we want to base our projections on facts and numbers, this is where we should put him.
If your distaste for Pagan is due to his injury history, then you have a legitimate worry. But the fact is that when he is on the field, he is a very good player. How much he will be on the field is rightfully in question, but that is true for pretty much any player.
The Blessed Barbarian (I had to get one more in there) is not just a fourth outfielder on a good team or a starter on a bad team. A superstar? No. Pagan is not an elite player to build a franchise around. But he is a really good player that could start at any of the three outfield positions for a World Series champion, and he could be a key component that gets that champion to the Promised Land. And considering that he is under team control for two more seasons at well-below market rates, we should be happy to send Pagan out as a starting outfielder for the foreseeable future.
32 comments
stickguy
12/29/2010-8:44am at 8:44 am (UTC -4)
I think you make a fine case to send this info to the 29 other GMs and see which one will part with a young, #2ish SP for him, also under team control for a few more years.
And the one number to not ignore is 30, the age he turns prior to the trade deadline this year. Not particularly young for a CF, or any guy that relies on his speed for a good portion of his value.
bottom line, I know the “he is more valuable to the Mets” argument, due to Beltran, but other teams need a CF also. And, he is a 2 year player, since no way I see Alderson extending a guy LT at age 32 to play CF.
so, if you are in the camp that says the Mets are retooling, and not legit playoff contenders in 2011 (and probably not 2012), try to sell at the peak on Pagan, since you realistically only have him for 2 more years.
Not trade him for scraps, but certainly troll him around to see what bites.
TRS86
12/29/2010-8:51am at 8:51 am (UTC -4)
Not sure he has the miles on him that a normal 30 year old has.
While I see the point in trading him, we have NO CF for 2012 and beyond and would have to address that through FA and chances are it would be a player just as old or more and more expensive.
TRS86
12/29/2010-8:49am at 8:49 am (UTC -4)
Couple of questions. Fangraphs has his WAR at 4.9 last year. Is that as a whole or as a CF?
Also according to Fangraphs his WAR put him at 5th in the MLB (3rd in NL) for CF. Would you say that is an accurate portrayal? It also has him 8th in the NL for all OF.
So based on WAR would Pagan be considered a top OF?
reyordonezrevival
12/29/2010-8:58am at 8:58 am (UTC -4)
WAR values include your entire season, so that 4.9 mark takes into account the time he spent in center, right and left. I do not think Pagan is a true talent 4.9 WAR player, that looks more like a career year. He put up a phenomenal 15.1 UZR in center field, and it is quite hard to replicate that number on a yearly basis. I knocked down that to 12.5 in my projection, but considering I have him playing right field, which is easier, that’s more than a 2.5 run dropoff. I think Pagan’s true talent lies around 3.5-4.25 WAR, depending on how much offense you think he can produce. And playing center field he has more value than right field, just because it’s harder to find center fielders.
I do not think Pagan is a 5 win player, that would make him a star. Being a 4 WAR outfielder, which is about where I see him, would have put him 20th in the big leagues for outfielders last season, which is about 7th best outfielder at each position, considering 20/3 is just under 7. That seems about right to me intuitively. Not in the elite top 5 at his position, but in the next tier.
TRS86
12/29/2010-9:08am at 9:08 am (UTC -4)
I see your point but his offense was also not quite as good in 2010 as it was in 2009. How much of that was due to his nagging injury in the 2nd half? don’t know. If he returns to something in between those seasons he is pretty darn close. I do wonder if he plays RF or CF.
reyordonezrevival
12/29/2010-9:13am at 9:13 am (UTC -4)
It’s certainly possible Pagan could be just as good offensively as his 2009 indicates, in which case he’d be a legitimate stud. But those other years did happen, so it makes sense to take them into account. And I guess I don’t want to go too Pagan crazy because I am trying to make some converts. If I predict him to be a real star, then it’s going to be a lot harder to get people to back him than if I just think he’ll be a really good player. But there certainly is potential for Pagan to exceed my projections. By the same token, there is potential for him to fall short. Odds are he won’t end exactly where I put him, but I think it’s a good middle-ground to work off of. And even if his poor second half performance was due to injury, we have to take that into account. While not with a horrible injury history, he does not have the best track record, so we shouldn’t expect him to play at 100 percent all the time.
Ceetar
12/29/2010-8:57am at 8:57 am (UTC -4)
I’m gonna buy myself a Pagan jersey for my birthday, early, for Spring Training.
Personally I don’t trust those UZR numbers, given the flip-flopping around, the crappy nature of UZR anyway, and the small sample size. But he’s definitely a good defender. And for all of the gushing over Francoeur’s arm, Pagan was keeping pace with him on outfield assists. (Beltran also has an above average arm, although his accuracy seems suspect sometimes)
But Pagan is extremely valuable to this team, and his versatility is good too. He also appears to be a pretty nice guy as well.
reyordonezrevival
12/29/2010-9:02am at 9:02 am (UTC -4)
The UZR numbers certainly shouldn’t be taken as fact. His 24.3 UZR/150 in right field is just not something that could be reasonably predicted going forward. That’s why I significantly docked him some runs there. But considering DRS, my second choice for defensive metrics, had him even better than UZR, I think my defensive projections were perfectly reasonable.
kingman 26
12/29/2010-9:17am at 9:17 am (UTC -4)
Well, going back to the Bay argument–my viewing tailed off in August and September, but I watched a huge percentage of the games Bay played—how many times did you find yourself saying “Wow, there’s a ball a good left fielder would have gotten to!” How many times? Any times??
Angel Pagan has played one full season as an MLB starter, and he will be 30 this summer—and as anyone can view, his month to month stats last year varied WILDLY. So any real-world evaluation of him is being done based on one year, half of which was excellent and half of which was mediocre, offensively speaking.
As for UZR—didn’t something get done to adjust the stat for Fenway so that suddenly Bay’s numbers changed dramatically?
I also have to say this–for years Bill James said there was “no such thing” as clutch hitting. Many disagreed. James’ thinking continued to evolve and change (despite what some here think, continuing to reconsider things and change one’s mind is a plus, not a minus) and now James says that clutch hitting does exist; he is just not sure of the best way to measure it.
Again, I read Bill James 30 years ago. I love OBP and WHIP.
But making these huge judgments on players based on these very new, unproven, and un-time-tested stats is potentially very fallible.
As for Pagan—he also is playing for a mediocre team, with zero pennant pressure, in a park which clearly rewards speed and defense.
Were he playing CF for the Cubs every day and they were in the thick of the pennant race, would his production be the same?
As for the whole WAR thing, it seems to be very arbitrary as to how it judges production; maybe I am wrong.
Do RBI count more when they are late and close in WAR or are all RBI the same? Do players who tend to hit .350 late/close get more credit than players who tend to hit .200 in those spots? I ask because I honestly don’t know.
Look, I respect people who take the game seriously and study it, but as someone who played baseball through high school and has watched closely since the mid-1970s, Jason Bay just is not a bad outfielder; it is not true–no stat that says he is is an accurate stat.
And Angel Pagan has had a few very good offensive months as a starting outfielder, but his “great” defense only emerged this year; his repeated bonehead mistakes in 2009 could have helped cost the team several wins—is this taken into account in his WAR number?
This is all very nice work, but to me Pagan needs to put up 1-2 more years of at least 2010′s numbers before he gets so much credit.
In addition, is his OBP really that great? His SLG? He’s a marginally good offensive player, a very good defensive player, and a very fast player.
Is he one of the game’s best outfielders? Too early to tell.
reyordonezrevival
12/29/2010-10:02am at 10:02 am (UTC -4)
Neither his OBP or SLG is particularly stellar. Rather, he is good in both, quite good in AVG, and when combined with his great defense and good baserunning, the overall package is a really good player. That was a major part of my point. He doesn’t do anything with the bat that is amazing, but he does enough things better than average that cumulatively he is well above average. I wouldn’t call him one of the game’s best outfielders, rather I’d put him in that next tier.
“James’ thinking continued to evolve and change (despite what some here think, continuing to reconsider things and change one’s mind is a plus, not a minus)”: This definitely true, and I always try my best to be open to being proven wrong. Just look at my about the author! “The snake which cannot cast its skin has to die. As well the minds which are prevented from changing their opinions; they cease to be mind.” Nietzsche gets some things right from time to time.
In regards to your question about WAR, there is way too much for me to answer that in this reply. But I can give you a quick response in regards to RBI. RBIs are not one of the components of WAR. wOBA is the offensive stat that the WAR batting totals are based off of, and wOBA is a linear weight stat. It measures everything you do in a context neutral environment. It treats every single as equal, regardless of whether the bases were loaded or empty. The reason for this is that batters have a true talent level, but this true talent is not revealed on a per play basis. Otherwise, Albert Pujols would be hitting home runs every at-bat. It is not even revealed over the course of a month, even a whole year. That is why we see such varying results for players year-to-year. So it really isn’t up to the player the context in which he gets his hits. If an entire season isn’t enough to see a player’s true talent, how will one at-bat? RBIs are dependent on the context (you might be up with runners on base, or might not) so WAR does not punish players for that.
kingman 26
12/29/2010-10:14am at 10:14 am (UTC -4)
Well, thanks for the reply. My question on WAR was in the spirit of thinking about how we judge players who hit very well with RISP/close and late and those who don’t, and how do we account for the fact that a player like Reyes has literally disappeared every September except 2006. His horrible Septembers in 2007 and 2008 were huge in the team’s missing the playoffs—WAR should somehow account for that. I.e., a player with a lesser overall WAR who did not wilt under pressure MIGHT have actually helped get the team into the playoffs one of those years.
As for the mind-changing thing, I like Emerson’s “A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds.”
Appreciate the response.
TRS86
12/29/2010-11:49pm at 11:49 pm (UTC -4)
But Kingman how would you account for that in his WAR? If he did perform in September his WAR would be much higher. A win is basically a win. Obviously we know there is more pressure in September but based on what I can tell WAR is measuring wins and if Reyes is uh… 4 WAR then he has provided the team 4 wins factoring in the entire season’s work. Ups and downs included.
kingman 26
12/29/2010-9:24am at 9:24 am (UTC -4)
“Right field, however, is one of the easier positions to play on the field, and we have to take that into account.”
Often the outfielders with the very best arms and most assists play RF, as the throw to third is so long and so important from there.
(Clemente, Strawberry, Dave Parker, Francoeur, etc).
kistics
12/29/2010-9:26am at 9:26 am (UTC -4)
a young Vlad…
kingman 26
12/29/2010-9:27am at 9:27 am (UTC -4)
Thank you; good one!
Ceetar
12/29/2010-9:37am at 9:37 am (UTC -4)
And Francoeur was a bad fielder, hence why he was there, where it maximized the only tool he had, his arm. And Pagan still had as many assists.
kistics
12/29/2010-9:25am at 9:25 am (UTC -4)
Great analysis!
One thing on UZRs. Is it possible to adjust his numbers based on ball-park factor? Citifield has a huge RF and hence his huge UZR numbers in the RF could be overblown? A bit like how Bay’s numbers were terrible at Fenway.
reyordonezrevival
12/29/2010-9:48am at 9:48 am (UTC -4)
UZR numbers take the park into account. I’m not sure if there is enough data on Citi Field yet that they have incorporated those park effects yet, though. So to answer your question I’m not sure.
But I think the word “overblown” is the wrong one to use, even if Pagan is distinctly a more valuable fielder in Citi. In a park where there is so much space, range is more important, so we should feel lucky we have players who can take advantage of it, not lessen their accomplishments by playing in a good environment for them.
njstuckintx
12/29/2010-10:00am at 10:00 am (UTC -4)
I’d say that Pagan is definitely an asset. I’m kind of in the Stick school of thought where Pagan should be moved if possible for SP. Why, pray tell? A combination of age, lack of assets overall in the Mets system and it’s easier to find a replacement outfielder in general.
eDaPS
12/29/2010-12:19pm at 12:19 pm (UTC -4)
I’ve argued till I was blue in the face for Pagan. Some people just don’t see how solid a player he has shown to be the last season or two.That being said, I DO agree that if you can get a good #2 SP with a package built around Pagan then they should do it.
Prismo
12/29/2010-12:22pm at 12:22 pm (UTC -4)
Welcome to RDM edaps.
eDaPS
12/29/2010-12:50pm at 12:50 pm (UTC -4)
Thank you very much. I’ve always liked the site but this is my first comment.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but this is where the oldschool MetsBlog posters came a year a two ago right?
eDaPS
12/29/2010-12:54pm at 12:54 pm (UTC -4)
Just read the “Our Story” piece. Guess I was right about that. The site is great. Outstanding job, guys.
Prismo
12/29/2010-1:08pm at 1:08 pm (UTC -4)
Yes, this is where we came. Unfortunately (or fortunately) the vast majority of us weren’t able to post on MB for the past year or so.
eDaPS
12/29/2010-1:29pm at 1:29 pm (UTC -4)
Yeah, it was a pretty bad way to run things. The upside, though, was that for every good poster that was locked out there were tons of bad posters locked out.
This is evidenced by the recent change in the comments section of MetsBlog. Good lord, they’ve come in swarms!
TRS86
12/29/2010-11:44pm at 11:44 pm (UTC -4)
Welcome eDaPS!!!
metsfan4decades
12/29/2010-12:37pm at 12:37 pm (UTC -4)
Very nice analysis.
My opinion of Pagan was always: ‘what’s not to like’?
I know pitching is at a premium right now, especially for the Mets. I don’t think it’s going to be as easy as some think to replace Pagan in the near future. So if Pagan winds up being traded, I’d like to see it for some young arm(s) who will contribute for some years to come. Not easy, to say the least, as just about every team is looking for pitching.
I’ll be keeping my eye on Philly this year. Right now, it appears to me they have basically the same team (one year older to boot), minus their RF, big RH bat and added a premium pitcher. Will the added Lee pitching every 5 days compensate for missing Werth’s bat every day? It will be interesting to see.
hazmet
12/29/2010-1:31pm at 1:31 pm (UTC -4)
Ah, another continuing Angel debate. I’ve stayed clear of this topic since my debating during last season that he’s an oft injured fourth outfielder who’s weaknesses would be exploited if slotted as a regular day player. ie – his many mental gaffs in 2009, his declining average in Aug-Sept in 2010. Up front, I like Angel, he’s a nice player and complimentary piece to a roster but his value to the Mets maybe greater to our team than to other teams since he had to play daily over the past 2 years whether it was rotating in for the injured Church – Beltran tandem pre Frenchy or for the injured Bay – Beltran tandem Frenchy & post Frenchy. On a contending teams with a less injured OF then our crew he’d be a 4th outfielder. For now he’s our starting RF and I’m OK with that for starters but if I can flip him in a deal for a SP, see ya Angel and thank you for your service. What impressed me most about Angel last year was not only his cutting down on defensive mistakes but his playing while hurt, which may have had something to do with his production decline in the second half.
oleosmirf
12/29/2010-7:59pm at 7:59 pm (UTC -4)
you cant trade Pagan b/c a CF is much harder to find than a #2 SP…
TRS86
12/29/2010-11:50pm at 11:50 pm (UTC -4)
I think you can trade him for a #2 because I consider that an upper rotation guy. You, however, are not getting an upper rotation guy for Pagan. I would not trade him for a mid rotation guy. Regardless of age we have NO replacements for him this year or more importantly next year.
stickguy
12/30/2010-1:22am at 1:22 am (UTC -4)
If he is a corner OF, then they have more potential options.
and again, do you think this team is a contender as it sits? Or maybe a better question is, would they be more or less of a contender if they could get another good (mid/upper rotation? a 21/2 guy?) that was under control for a few years?
the Mets really need more weight at SP. Just not enough in the system. Plus, I really don’t see him as a LT (post 2012) solution.
What the hell, the Mets got him in a ML deal. The Phils got their CF as a rule 5. So odds are they will find a good glove CF someplace!
chaim
2/15/2011-9:03am at 9:03 am (UTC -4)
great story