MLB Landscaping, Part Two: Where the Skills Are

It's one thing to know where the youth/experience is among MLB's positions, but it's another thing to know where they value is and how that value is composed.  To keep the introduction here short and sweet, this post is all about breaking down which positions are producing the most talent and how the talent at those positions is being accrued.  Let's begin.

  

Part One: WAR

  

I've already talked about the initial problems with WAR and how the replacement level baseline doesn't tell you much about the distribution of talent at the MLB level, so let's get right into a chart:

  

Average WAR by Position
1B	2.78
2B	2.96
3B	3.17
C	2.73
CF	3.37
DH	2.43
LF	2.82
RF	2.77
RPL	1.53
RPR	1.49
SPL	2.54
SPR	2.52
SS	2.54

  

This is really fun to look at, because you can look at both sides of WAR.  On one hand, we already know that it's hardest to produce value at 1B, LF, and RF.  We also know it's easiest to produce value at SS, 2B, and C (when I say "easiest" I mean you have to do less compared to the league average player to produce your value at said position).  However, look at the value for shortstop.  Even though this position sees one of the biggest bumps in positional value, it still produces the least amount of value.  This implies that the position is incredibly hard to play and pretty darn thin.  As we've seen with Troy Tulowitzki, Jose Reyes, and Hanley Ramirez, the position comes with a seemingly high rate of injury occurrence.  With how amazing these players are (the same thing goes for catchers), maintaining their greatness is made harder by the fact that it's tougher to stay on the field.  Meanwhile, look how great center field is.  As a position, they blow all other positions out of the water with an average of 3.37 WAR per player (2nd place is 3rd base at 3.17).  These two positions have somewhat similar positional/replacement adjustments that are high.  This means that the positions are hard to play and center field is currently in a renaissance of sorts.  

  

On the pitching side, there appears to be absolutely no noticeable difference between lefties and righties.  Even though there are far more right-handed starters, it appears that the importance of left-handed pitchers is overstated by the media.  While there aren't as many of them, they don't appear to be any better than right-handed pitchers.  Even left-handed relievers, who are often brought in in situations where they often face left-handed batters, aren't noticeably better than right-handed relievers.  I believe this represents a fallacy in thinking.  Teams don't *need* to have left-handers on their staffs for those staffs to be effective on a whole.  Does it help with splits?  Yes, but when you consider that being right-handed is much more common than being left-handed, how often does being a left-handed pitcher actually help?

  

And now, here are the positions ranked by their average WAR in one table and total WAR in another table:

  

Average WAR  

1) CF

2) 3B

3) 2B

4) LF

5) 1B

6) RF

7) C

8) SS

9) SPL

10) SPR

11) DH

12) RPL

13) RPR

  

Total WAR

  

1) SPR

2) CF

3) SPL

4) 3B

5) C

6) RF

7) LF

8) 2B

9) SS

10) RPR

11) 1B

12) DH

13) RPL

  

I believe that this shows that positions such as SS, DH, and RPL are exceptionally thin as all three positions are low in the rankings in both average WAR and total WAR.  Right now, Center Field takes the cake as the best overall position in baseball, in my opinion.  Highest average WAR, 2nd most total WAR, and a depth of talent.  Meanwhile, the DH position is noticeably weak because of the revolving door philosophy that comes with the position.  An interesting note here is that starting pitching ranks high in total WAR (because there are a lot of starters) but ranks very low in average WAR.  This could be that FIP-based WAR isn't telling the whole story, but it could also be that pitching is still really thin even though the current MLB environment seems to favor pitchers.

  

Part Two: wRC+

  

For those that are unaware, this is a measure of offensive performance. For the purposes of this part of the analysis, I am going to treat every individual measure of wRC+ as a point (so having a 100 wRC+ gives you one hundred points).  Here are some fun facts about the spread of wRC+ in the league:

  

1) Players between 26-30 produce a staggering 53.51% of points within wRC+.  Players between the ages of 31 and 37 produced 32.5% of the points.  Young players (those younger than 26) produced only 12.47% of the points.

2) Note the chart below.

3) 30 year olds produced an average of 119 points of wRC+, which stands above every other age.  

  

Average wRC+ by Position (Points)
1B	127.11
2B	101.96
3B	114.97
C	112.67
CF	108.29
DH	132.13
LF	117.82
RF	116.21
SS	93.93

  

First basemen and designated hitters produce a LOT more offense than everyone else.  That being said the 3B, LF, and RF positions aren't doing too poorly either.  Meanwhile, shortstops are anemic on offense and second basemen are pretty much on-par with the league average.  One position of note is catchers.  In the top 417 players, catchers produced their fair share of wRC+.

  

Overall, the offensive numbers are not shocking.  The power positions produce more offense than others (and this is reflected in WAR).  However, when you consider the positional adjustments that are given, the gap between first basemen and positions like, for example, catcher seems really small.  While replacement level offense is really low for catchers, current MLB catchers seem to be just fine producing offensively (this is an example of something WAR wouldn't necessarily be able to tell you).

  

Part Three: BsR

  

Offense wasn't surprising, so perhaps base running will come with a surprise or two.  In my opinion, base running is the second most underrated aspect of baseball (besides hitting for power, which I feel has actually become an underrated skill in the grand context of all things baseball).  BsR is interesting, because base running is partly based in speed, partly based in skill, and partly based in overall opportunities.  There are also different types of players that will play each position.  For example, both Rickey Henderson and Adam Dunn have logged significant innings in left field.  This means that the numbers will be fun to look at.  Let's start:

   

Average BsR by Position
1B	-2.60
2B	1.66
3B	-0.74
C	-1.69
CF	3.50
DH	-2.56
LF	1.35
RF	1.17
SS	1.71

  

Well, if you're surprised by anything here, you shouldn't be.  Outfielders and middle infielders are typically really good at running the bases.  First basemen and designated hitters are terrible at it, and then there's a really interesting case: catchers.  Now, having watched a lot of baseball, I can tell you that most catchers are pretty slow relative to the rest of the league.  However, they are quite a bit better than their slow-moving counterparts at 1B and DH.  To me, this could come down to the incredible baseball IQ it takes to be a MLB catcher.  Catchers have to know game situations better than anyone.  Also, since they work with pitchers all the time, they should be fairly good at reading them.  This leads to better jumps and, I would assume, a lower frequency of being picked off.  By knowing situations, they can get around the fact that they don't have speed (not trying to slam first baseman or DH's here, but come on...catchers are really smart).  This difference could also come out of the fact that the mid-tier catchers simply aren't playing as much and don't rack up as much negative value as full-time poor base runners.  However, if knowing situations is important to base running, then does experience help to alleviate the loss of speed with age?  I have another chart for that!

  

Average BsR by Age

20	0.40
21	12.00
22	0.00
23	0.68
24	-0.24
25	1.50
26	1.24
27	0.31
28	1.84
29	0.84
30	0.04
31	0.19
32	0.59
33	-0.70
34	0.76
35	0.56
36	-1.58
37	-1.28
38	0.00
39	0.33
40	0.00
41	-1.20
42	0.00

  

Take a look at the chart and then take into account the following list of points:

  

1) Players from ages 20-25 (now, this includes Mike Trout's ridiculous numbers from this year) produced a BsR of 18.61 last year.

2) Players from ages 26-30 produced a BsR of 4.27

3) Players from ages 31-35 produced 1.40 BsR

4) Most players are between 26-35.

  

As I mentioned in the disclaimer in the other post, I have to do some fake math to illustrate things.  For example, the "average" 21 year old produced 12 BsR.  This inflates the BsR for the first category quite a bit. Regardless, it would appear that being youthful and having more speed matters more in terms of BsR than knowing game situations.  This doesn't surprise me, given the fact that the biggest part of base running is being fast as we've seen in the position breakdown (just look at how much better center fielders are at base running than everyone else).  

  

Part Four: UZR

  

Offense and base running provided no real surprises other than the fact that catchers are better at both than expected.  Perhaps the real surprise will come in defense:

  

Total UZR by Position
1B	18.5
2B	59.2
3B	58.8
C	29.8
CF	79.7
DH	-8.8
LF	38.1
RF	33.9
SS	77.7

  

Even though they are playing easier positions or barely playing at all, first basemen and designated hitters are still terrible fielders by UZR on average.  Now, there are some pretty inherent biases against first basemen by defensive metrics.  Range is a big factor for most positions on defense, but it really isn't a big part of being a first baseman.  A first baseman's biggest responsibility is receiving throws, and there just isn't a good way to show that within modern defensive metrics (unless the metric takes into account the ability to scoop). It doesn't just come down to scooping bad throws, either.  Being really tall is pretty darn valuable at first base, because the range where throws can be received is increased.  Anyway, UZR also isn't the best tool in the world for rating catchers.  UZR can't take game calling or pitch framing into account (neither can other defensive metrics, actually).  A lot of catcher defensive value isn't recognized by modern metrics.  Finally, it's not surprising that SS and CF combine for the largest UZR.  They are the two most important non-catcher positions defensively (in the minds of current baseball people...who knows, we may all be wrong in that assumption) and players often make MLB at those positions because they can flash the leather.  For example, Brendan Ryan's bat is atrocious, but he locks down a starting job because he produces so much defensive value.

  

Using the points concept, like with wRC+, we can look at defense by position too:

  

Average UZR by Age
20	7.20
21	11.40
22	0.00
23	3.88
24	4.27
25	3.69
26	1.58
27	-0.21
28	-0.08
29	3.79
30	0.45
31	2.95
32	-0.03
33	1.65
34	0.63
35	0.32
36	4.10
37	1.31
38	0.00
39	2.90
40	0.00
41	1.80
42	0.00

Some notes:

  

1) Players between the ages of 20 and 28 produced nearly 31.7 points of UZR after adding up their averages. This was massive compared to the 19.9 points produced by players aged 29 to 42.  Younger players are much better at defense.

2) Let's not forget that current center fielders are very young.  Now, this is probably by design given that it would appear smart to move an aging player off of an important position like center field, but it is important.  The most important defensive positions are young, which helps keep the defensive advantage in favor of youthful players.

3) Catchers tend to be older and are underrated by UZR.  This could hurt the overall defensive ratings for older players.  If catchers were properly rated, perhaps there wouldn't be a noticeable difference in defensive ability (but really, I think there would be because youth means physical skill, which means a better ability to go get and throw the ball).

  

Part Five: xFIP

  

This is the one section where I'm really limited because I can't do the proper math with the information I've been given.  Going back to the points system, here is some info:

  

Average Points of xFIP
RPL	3.02
RPR	3.15
SPL	3.89
SPR	3.88

  

This is where numbers are, again, misleading.  While right-handed starters and left-handed starters come out with the exact same average number of points for xFIP by position, there are a lot more right-handed starters.  The same goes for right-handed relievers.  That being said, even if I did have the time and resources to do the proper math with xFIP, I imagine there would still be no noticeable difference between right-handed and left-handed pitchers (as we've seen with WAR).  

  

It is always funny seeing xFIP numbers for the better relievers, though.  Relievers that are good enough to appear in the top 417 players in WAR are seriously good at their jobs.  Think of it this way: only 11 left-handed relievers are in the top 417 players by WAR.  Their average number of points sitting at 3.02 is not surprising at all.

  

Part Six: Overall Conclusions

  

I think there are a few things that can be taken away from this little sweep of the current MLB landscape:

  

1) Catchers that are actually in MLB are severely underrated.  While their replacement levels are deservedly placed low, I think the perception of the catcher position is misleading.  While most are not full time players (by design), it's apparent that these guys are better than they are given credit for.  They averaged 112 points of wRC+, have defensive qualities that can't be accounted for by defensive metrics, and are better base runners than they are given credit for being.  In fact, the years of experience fact really surprised me.  I think even the league's backup catchers are severely underrated.  Over 33 catchers produced at least a win of value, which means several reserve catchers were putting up strong value numbers even with limited playing time.

  

2) The first base position is surprisingly weak compared to previous years.  While still better than the other positions offensively, the gap has been significantly reduced.  I think this difference could be due to an emphasis of importance on coming up as a well-rounded player.  Now that we know how valuable defense and base running are, coaches at all levels are making it known that being well-rounded or capable of playing a premium position is the fastest way to the majors.  If I were a coach at the lower levels, I would put my best players at the most difficult positions until they proved that they couldn't play them (which appears to already be the case most of the time.)

  

3) Center field is experiencing the kind of renaissance that is rarely seen in MLB.  While Mike Trout and Bryce Harper won't be regular center fielders this next season, we know they obviously have the ability to play the position.  Even with Matt Kemp missing significant time and struggling at times in the second half, the position was still incredible across the board.  In terms of defense there may be some bias towards the position, but center fielders are ridiculous across the board.  Strong on offense, very strong on the bases, and outstanding defensively.

  

4) Shortstop is still the thinnest of all of the positions.  The position produces less average value per player than the other offensive positions despite carrying a very low replacement level.  Even though it is easy to produce value while at shortstop (again, relative to what the average player has to do to produce value at the average position), the position is so hard to play that staying on the field and producing enough to take advantage of this is incredibly hard.  Injuries often plague the position, and the position was especially hurt by the loss of Troy Tulowtizki, who shines offensively and defensively.  

  

5) Handedness is overrated for pitchers.  The concept of a LOOGY (a left-handed specialist) is often frowned upon in the SABR community, and it appears to be for good reason.  I think it simply comes as a result of the fact that more people are naturally right-handed than left-handed, so the opportunity for lefties to take advantage of their splits doesn't come often enough to be valuable.  To be a modern MLB pitcher, you need to be able to get both lefties and righties out regardless of whether you are a starter or a reliever.  

  

6) The phrase "in his prime" exists for a reason.  An overwhelming amount of value came from players who are between the ages of 26-30.  Some of this comes out of the fact that most starters don't start getting regular innings before the age of 23.  They take longer to develop, which pushes their production back in later years.  Still, the things I looked at certainly seemed to show that being youthful is more important than being experienced.  It also showed, however, that MLB experience is an important part of the development process (otherwise, we'd see more value between the ages of 21-25).  There's still a place for older players on a ball club, but your chances of fielding a championship-caliber roster are increased if you can have as many players in this age range as possible.