Melky Cabrera and players who bloom at age 26
Posted by Andy on August 22, 2011
Melky Cabrera is having a career year for the Royals. After looking "on the cusp" for several season with the Yankees and Braves, he's put it all together this year and has already reached career highs in HR, RBI, R, H, and SB, and currently has his career-best marks for BA, SLG, and OPS.
But what does the future hold for him? Read on for more.
Since 1970, there have been 176 players who posted an OPS+ of at least 124 in their Age 26 season (and qualified for the batting title). That includes 6 guys who are currently doing it this year:
| Rk | Player | Year | Age | Tm | G | PA | AB | R | H | 2B | 3B | HR | RBI | BB | SO | Pos | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Matt Kemp | 2011 | 166 | 26 | LAD | 125 | 527 | 462 | 76 | 148 | 24 | 3 | 28 | 91 | 56 | 118 | .320 | .393 | .567 | .960 | *8/D |
| 2 | Daniel Murphy | 2011 | 124 | 26 | NYM | 109 | 423 | 391 | 49 | 125 | 28 | 2 | 6 | 49 | 24 | 42 | .320 | .362 | .448 | .809 | 354/7 |
| 3 | Melky Cabrera | 2011 | 125 | 26 | KCR | 123 | 559 | 521 | 76 | 159 | 33 | 4 | 16 | 74 | 27 | 72 | .305 | .338 | .476 | .814 | *8/7D9 |
| 4 | Brennan Boesch | 2011 | 124 | 26 | DET | 111 | 461 | 417 | 73 | 119 | 25 | 1 | 16 | 54 | 35 | 77 | .285 | .345 | .465 | .810 | *79/D |
| 5 | Matthew Joyce | 2011 | 133 | 26 | TBR | 108 | 399 | 355 | 57 | 97 | 23 | 2 | 16 | 54 | 37 | 82 | .273 | .338 | .485 | .823 | *97/D |
| 6 | Troy Tulowitzki | 2011 | 133 | 26 | COL | 122 | 524 | 469 | 67 | 143 | 34 | 2 | 25 | 85 | 49 | 59 | .305 | .371 | .546 | .917 | *6 |
Of those 176 guys, I went back and found how many had never posted a qualified season with an OPS+ of 96 or better in any of their seasons before Age 26. Here are the 36 guys who, like Cabrera, have done that:
2011 Matthew Joyce 2011 Melky Cabrera 2009 Kendrys Morales 2009 Shin-Soo Choo 2008 Nate McLouth 2006 Garrett Atkins 2006 Ryan Howard 2005 Chase Utley 2005 Jason Bay 2005 Nick Johnson 2004 Aaron Rowand 2002 Alfonso Soriano 1996 Dave Nilsson 1994 Bob Hamelin 1993 Bernard Gilkey 1993 Orlando Merced 1992 Dave Hollins 1991 Felix Jose 1991 Hal Morris 1990 Cecil Fielder 1989 Bo Jackson 1987 Andy Van Slyke 1987 Howard Johnson 1987 John Kruk 1986 Joe Carter 1986 Kirby Puckett 1985 Mike Davis 1985 Phil Bradley 1982 Lonnie Smith 1980 Tony Armas 1975 George Foster 1974 Elliott Maddox 1973 Gene Tenace 1973 Joe Ferguson 1973 Willie Crawford 1970 Cito Gaston
Reading down that list, it seems that guys fit snugly into one of two categories: late-bloomers in MLB or players who put up one or two career seasons later in their careers. The million dollar question (or maybe more like 20 million dollar) is: which category does Melky Cabrera fit into?
August 22nd, 2011 at 3:41 am
Every Braves fan who watched Melky pack on the pounds and weak ground outs last year is absolutely flabbergasted (and a little peeved) at his sudden turn around.
Atlanta giving him an outright release is apparently the best thing that ever happened to him..
August 22nd, 2011 at 8:41 am
Melky is having a very good year, but I'm a bit skeptical about his long term chances. His defense is poor in CF, and his improvement this year seems to be largely batting average driven. Even if we dismiss 2010 as a mirage based on Melky either being out of shape, sulking, or both, his main stats aren't significantly different than his 2009 with the Yankees - except for that he's hitting more singles, walking at a lower rate and striking out more.
2005: .235
2006: .310
2007: .301
2008: .273
2009: .291
2010: .290
2011: .330
If we drop that BABIP down to .300, he's hitting .280/.314/.415 this year. If he was an excellent defensive CF, that would actually be a pretty nice player to have batting 9th. Melky's not, though.
He'll get a healthy raise in arbitration though, that's for sure.
August 22nd, 2011 at 9:10 am
Ryan, how the hell did you post that comment before I even published the post?
August 22nd, 2011 at 9:59 am
I watched Melky during his time in the Bronx, and there was nothing in what he did-no great flashes of brilliance-that would indicate that he would be a star. He was an OK player-he could run a little, field the position (albeit, not brilliantly), hit a little, show occasional power. This is clearly a step up from his Yankee days, and he was abysmal for the Braves last year. Maybe he's just matured, maybe it's that he's in a lower-pressure enviorment, and maybe it's just statistical noise. Jeff Francouer is having a better than expected year with the Royals as well, and I don't think that makes him a great player either. I guess we will have to see.
August 22nd, 2011 at 10:01 am
Yeah what the hell is up with that contract extension the Royals gave to Francouer...?!?
August 22nd, 2011 at 10:35 am
@2, Jim -- You're comparing Melky's 2011 to his previous best season, and also not adjusting for the 10% drop in AL scoring from 2009 to this year.
Comparing Melky to his career rates, it's not just his BABIP that's up, but also his ratio of extra-base hits to total hits -- 33% this year compared to a previous average of 27%. That's not exactly surprising for a player moving into his theoretical prime years, but it does boost his value.
My overall take: It's not a great year by any means, but it's a welcome plus for the Royals. Too bad he can't pitch....
August 22nd, 2011 at 10:46 am
@5, Frenchy isn't getting a huge amount of money. Without analyzing KC's financial obligations, I would guess that guys like Hosmer and Butler and even Gordon aren't due a ton of money the next year or two, either.
Plus, I'm sure a large part of their desire to resign him is due to the old "veteran leadership" nonsense. And Francouer isn't that old, actually, even though it seems like he's been around forever.
It's not a terrible contract but it is questionable, especially given that I can't see a ton of teams lining up for a low-OBP guy. However he is a 20/20 candidate this year and there aren't a ton of those players in MLB either, so you can kind of see where KC is coming from. Sort of.
August 22nd, 2011 at 10:51 am
The only way it makes sense to me is if they see next year as yet another rebuilding year and have no young players at his position, or nobody they want to stick in the majors just yet. Francouer is certainly a decent enough player, and as you say is only 27. I guess he's not a bad option to keep around on short money to ensure that right field isn't a black hole. But if he reverts to 2010 performance (which is closer to his career average than 2011 is), then it really seems like a needless logjam.
August 22nd, 2011 at 10:54 am
Andy, given their pitching situation I don't see how they can view 2012 as anything but another building year unless there's about 4 starters in the high minors I know nothing about. This may be the case as I don't follow the Royals very closely (like most everyone else outside of KC...)
August 22nd, 2011 at 10:55 am
@5, Andy, re Francoeur extension: Wow, I didn't know about that until you mentioned it. That's exactly the kind of move that bad organizations make time and time again.
When you get a miraculously productive year from someone like Francoeur, a smart GM says "thank you very much" and moves on, confident that an established leopard rarely changes his spots.
Before this year, there were 5-1/2 years of data showing that Frenchy is a crappy offensive player -- .310 OBP, 92 OPS+. This year, .327 and 117. Having watched him with the Mets for a couple of years, while knowing his prior history, I would bet my house that he will never learn to lay off 2-strike breaking balls outside the zone. He's awful with 2 strikes -- career .174 BA/.219 OBP, compared to a 2011 AL avg. of .184/.252. There's nothing in his detailed record this year that shows any fundamental improvement in such areas -- his K rate is higher than his previous career rate, his BB rate is typical, and he's hitting .160 with 2 strikes.
What a dumb extension. I think the Royals will never be a contender under Dayton Moore.
P.S. I loved this opening from the K.C. Star article reporting Francoeur's extension:
The word outfielder Jeff Francoeur kept using Thursday afternoon was “comfortable” in explaining why he agreed to a two-year contract extension with the Royals rather than test the free-agent market after a bounce-back season.
Yeah, I guess he's comfortable accepting twice as much money and years as any team would have offered him.
August 22nd, 2011 at 10:57 am
@ 9,10:
It certainly is a sad state of affairs how bad the Royals have been for so long. I was very hopeful that Moore would bring a smarter approach to drafting and free-agency, and while I'm not ready to make as strong a statement as JA, it ain't looking good.
August 22nd, 2011 at 10:59 am
BTW, Frenchy's B-R page says there was already a 2012 "mutual option" for $4 million.
I've never quite grasped the "mutual option" concept. If either side can say no, how is it different from not having a contract at all?
August 22nd, 2011 at 11:01 am
I've always felt that mutual options were simply agents trying to pump up years and dollar values on contracts, i.e. they can say they got a 2-year deal instead of a 1-year deal, or a 6-year deal instead of a 5-year deal, and the money in that option year tends to be high as well, which is why teams often decline them (unless salaries have escalated so much that it's actually now a bargain...)
August 22nd, 2011 at 11:04 am
Posnanski's take on the Francoeur contract:
http://sportadore.com/Away?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwp.me%2FpVBCv-241
The big finish:
[T]his is precisely the sort of uninspiring move that the Royals have made for 15 years. They stick a Scott Podsednik … Jason Kendall … Rick Ankiel … Jose Guillen … Mike Jacobs … Ross Gload … Mark Grudzielanek … Reggie Sanders … Doug Mientkiewicz … Terrence Long … Matt Stairs … Tony Graffanino … Michael Tucker … I can keep going … they stick one of these veteran types out there and they hope for the best.... Francoeur may be different. He’s 27, so he’s not old. He won’t mail it in now that he’s got his contract. He does seem to make the players around him happier. But, it just seems to me that the Royals are supposed to be this young, exciting, vibrant team on the move. And when you sign Jeff Francoeur to a two-year deal, you are just kind of standing still.
August 22nd, 2011 at 12:05 pm
The only reason Andy Van Slyke is on the second list is because of the qualified for the batting title stipulation, not the low OPS+. In his 4 ML seasons prior to turning 26 he had one year with an OPS+ of 106 and his other 3 ranged between 114 & 118 with between 360 & 475 PA's.
Kirby Puckett, on the other hand, really took a big step forward in his age 26 season.
Still, I think Melky's career path is a lot more likely to follow Aaron Rowand or Nate McLouth than Van Slkye or Puckett's.
August 22nd, 2011 at 12:08 pm
Cheer up, JA and Andy. Maybe Frenchy will be a little like Paul O'Neill, who was a bit better than average when Cincy traded him to the Yankees, but just barely. His 1991 season looked a lot like a Melky or Francoeur season, except he walked a bit more. O'Neill was traded for Roberto Kelly, and I distinctly remember Bill James calling it a "classic Yankee blunder".
Maybe there's hope?
August 22nd, 2011 at 12:19 pm
Andy Van Slyke! WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
August 22nd, 2011 at 12:47 pm
@6, John Autin
You're correct that Melky's EBH rate is up a tad and that he's posting a career high. However, the increase in his line drive rate and EBH rate doesn't seem to be enough to sustain the 40 point increase in his BABIP. We'll see. If he sustains his increased power and gets his walk rate back to 2007-2010 levels, that'll lessen the blow from the BABIP correction.
August 22nd, 2011 at 1:22 pm
Sometimes a player just needs a place to play everyday and a vote of confidence from the manager. The rest takes care of itself. Right Jose? Right Big Papi? Right Papa Smurf?
August 22nd, 2011 at 1:25 pm
Melky currently has the same number of extra-base hits (53) as Ryan Howard. Who would've thunk it?
August 22nd, 2011 at 2:06 pm
lol at you guys criticizing royals for upping francouer after years of bad data
*cough* gordon *cough*
August 22nd, 2011 at 2:09 pm
i don't know if you can downgrade melky for babip so readily. remember when pujols was definitely going to bat .250 for the season based on his babip and ichiro was definitely going to recover and bat .310?
August 22nd, 2011 at 2:12 pm
It's incredible that Pujols has cranked his OPS+ all the way up to 149, and also incredible that that's still low enough to be a career-worst mark for him.
August 22nd, 2011 at 3:20 pm
@Andy
I saw the link on the BR Twitter account and read it.
I guess my twitter defies the time space continuum.
August 22nd, 2011 at 3:28 pm
Also regarding the Frenchy signing - this is an obvious ploy by Moore to attempt to secure him in order to trade him to Houston for Jordan Schater.
August 22nd, 2011 at 4:16 pm
@16, Mike L -- Paul O'Neill's 1991 season -- a 127 OPS+, 4.1 Wins Above Replacement -- is far above any season of Francoeur's career.
More to the point, O'Neill had a .336 career OBP before joining the Yanks, 5 points above the non-pitcher, park-adjusted league average for those years combined.
Francoeur to date has a .312 OBP, 23 points below that same average.
I think the Frenchy optimists may not realize how unusual it is for a guy with his lack of plate discipline to blossom.
And to Jason, who has Alex Gordon stuck in his throat:
-- Gordon's career line before this year showed a .328 OBP in 408 games, and 65 walks per 162 games.
-- Francoeur's career line before this year showed a .311 OBP in 845 games (twice as many games as Gordon) and 33 walks per 162 games (half as many walks as Gordon).
August 22nd, 2011 at 4:20 pm
ALEX Gordon! I thought he was referring to Tom Gordon and couldn't figure out his point.
August 22nd, 2011 at 4:27 pm
@22
Your points kind of contradict each other. Cabrera, like Pujols and Ichiro, are established players with established patterns of results. The people who were saying Ichiro would recover were the same peope saying Pujols would recover. You've taken two arguments made by different groups and attempted to give them one voice. Pujols has recovered to an extent, while Ichiro hasn't. It appears that Ichiro's decline has to do with a degradation in skills - that was always going to happen eventually. Pujols's numbers are gradually climbing, though the drop in his walk rate makes me nervous.
With Cabrera, he's an improved play hitter based on the higher LD rates, but he's walking less and striking out more than he has in recent years. He's doing some things better, and some things worse.There's enough contradictory information on him that I'm skeptical that his improvement is sustainable. That doesn't mean I'm positive he's going to fall back on his face, it just means I'm unconvinced.
August 22nd, 2011 at 4:51 pm
@26 John A, the 1991 season was the best of O'Neill's career, and he regressed in 1992 to 14/56/.246/.346/.373 (OPS+102, but they weren't counting then). He was unquestionably better than Melky by our standards based on his pre-1992 history, but then look at Melky's numbers his last year in NY: 13/68/.274/.336/.416
August 22nd, 2011 at 5:43 pm
@10 JA -
Agreed that the Francoeur extension is ridiculous when I thought he might be done after last year, but it's a bit harsh to say the Royals might not ever contend under Dayton Moore. He has completely rebuilt the farm system and has a plan. Jeff is a place holder as those kids aren't ready for a couple more years anyway. I agree that they way overpaid for him but if you're suggesting that they might go after a prized FA OF this offseason, then I really don't see that happening...
As far as Melky is concerned, he looked fat, lazy and unmotivated last year. Maybe when you make it to the Royals, Pirates or Nats that's your final wake up call?
As a Braves fan, I see both players as having fluky career years in a low pressure, low exposure environment...
August 22nd, 2011 at 5:52 pm
Love seeing Gene Tenace! He had a heck of a career.
August 22nd, 2011 at 6:53 pm
But Gene Tenace showing up on the same list with Joe Carter, Tony Armas and Cito Gaston? Talk about different approaches and types of players.
August 22nd, 2011 at 9:08 pm
The Royals might be treading water in the batting order, but seem to have found religion as far as young pitching. It seems like their entire bullpen is rookies... Adcock and Jeffress have struggled, a combined 4.59 era (≈87 ERA+) in 64.2 IP, 41/35 k/bb ratio. Collins is the youngest (turned 22 yesterday), and walks a lot of guys, but has room to improve. Crow and Coleman have been very impressive: 2.12 era in 106.1 IP, 109 k, 49 bb. Blake Wood and Greg Holland are second-year guys. Starting pitcher Danny Duffy is a rookie.
They also have two 21-year olds in AAA, Mike Montgomery and Kelvin Herrera; Herrera has fast-tracked from high-A all the way to Omaha this year, his first as a reliever.
August 22nd, 2011 at 10:08 pm
@30, 704_Brave -- Maybe I was too harsh on Dayton Moore. I think he's done an awful job on the big-league level -- Francoeur is just one in a long line -- but I should wait and see how much that vaunted talent pipeline puts out.
It had better pump out a couple of SPs pretty soon, though.
August 22nd, 2011 at 10:20 pm
Do the Royals plan to give Aaron Crow a shot in the rotation next season?
August 23rd, 2011 at 9:42 am
@34 JA. The thing about the Royals (and there are a few other teams in this category) is that they have a propensity to look for the Melky's and Francours. They want someone who can fill the slot at a relatively inexpensive price. Because they haven't really been competitive, the mindset seems to be that if you aren't going to win anyway, what's the point in seeking out and paying a lot more for someone who might have 2 WAR more-it's not going to change your place in the standings. I think that the hardest thing to do as a GM is to manage the mediocre team with expectations about their farm system. You aren't attractive to potential fee agents, your attendance and revenues slip, you don't want long term contracts when you think you might have a (cheaper) guy at AAA who is a year away. You are never playing for "this year", so why bother.
August 23rd, 2011 at 9:43 am
I think the Frenchy signing has to do with being thin on outfielders down in the minors. Sure, there is MLB ready Lorenzo Cain, but Eibner & Myers have to ripen on the farm some yet. As much as I like David Lough, he is really just organizational filler. You can't realistically expect them to put Clint Robinson out there. (or DH Robinson & use Butler's glove)
August 23rd, 2011 at 11:24 am
@36, Mike L -- Absolutely, down-market teams need to find "someone who can fill the slot at a relatively inexpensive price." By no means do I think that the Royals should have tried fill Francoeur's spot with some more expensive player with a better performance upside.
But if you think $6.75 million a year is relatively inexpensive, you've lost me. And if you think locking in that rate for two years isn't dumb, I'm baffled.
What the Royals and other teams in their situation have to do is trawl the inexpensive player poor every year, making the best risk-to-reward gambles, but never form sentimental attachments to ordinary players.
Giving a player like Francoeur a market-rate extension (which is putting the kindest spin on it) is like a gambler who wins a longshot and decides, "Hey, I'm hot! -- time to double my bets!" Market-rate, multi-year deals for non-stars are losing bets in the long run for mid-budget teams.
I believe there will be a RF available this offseason for less money, on a 1-year deal, with at least as good an expected performance as Francoeur ... unless, that is, you think that Frenchy's expected performance is what he's done this year, in which case, enjoy the Kool-Aid.
August 23rd, 2011 at 11:26 am
Oh yeah!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nBeUGqeYsQg
August 23rd, 2011 at 11:40 am
By the way, my perspective on Francoeur is that of a Mets fan who has seen this "better-than-expected!" show before.
We picked him up in a July 2009 swap of disappointments (sending Ryan Church to ATL), and for the rest of that year, he was a revelation, hitting .311 with a 120 OPS+. I even tried to make myself believe that it represented real development for Frenchy, who was only 25 at the time -- even though I knew deep down that it was a BABIP mirage, and that his underlying habits (he accepted 8 unintentional walks in 75 games) did not bode well.
Reality set in by the following May, and by the time we basically waived him to Texas in August (sending him and cash for a player we waived in November), he had a 79 OPS+ for the year and 97 for his 200-game Mets tenure.
Now he's 2 years older than when we got him, and the hitting habits that make long-term success unlikely are just the same, but more entrenched.
Why commit for 2 years to a placeholder?
August 23rd, 2011 at 11:46 am
@39, Andy -- That's memory lane for me!
I wonder ... do the Royals have a mascot already?
August 23rd, 2011 at 4:51 pm
John A @various: I think they way overpaid Frenchy. But he does a lot of shiny things that people find attractive. And KC has always had the odd overpaid clubhouse enthusiasm guy. Maybe they thought he would turn down the option, they would have to offer him arbitration to keep him, and they would get their clocks cleaned? And maybe I'm being mean, but, sometimes there's a reason why certain organizations can't sustain winning for long (or at all) that's more than just money. Dayton Moore should have channeled some of that cold-blooded Theo Epstein serum-in Boston, when you are done, you are very often ferried out as fast as the truck can take your stuff.