Yasiel Puig vs. Jose Iglesias

A quick break from the political and policy world to focus on baseball. In particular, I want to look at the season that Yasiel Puig has had so far. The Los Angeles Dodgers rookie outfielder has taken the league by storm, earning both NL Rookie and Player of the Month awards in June. Sports Illustrated featured him in their latest magazine and he also finished 2nd in the All Star final vote. Overall, not a bad start to a player’s career.

But, as a biased Red Sox fan, I want to push back on all this publicity. First of all, Puig hasn’t even played in 40 games. Under just about no circumstances should a player who’s appeared in a quarter of the season make the All Star game. Puig is off to an incredible start, but his stats aren’t good enough to justify inclusion over other NL snubs such as Ian Desmond or Jay Bruce. Freddie Freeman is more deserving as well I’m glad the fans chose him over Puig in the Final Vote.

Now to my Red Sox bias. Over in Beantown, the Sox have their own rookie who’s off to just about as good a start as Puig, but isn’t getting anywhere close to the attention. That would be shortstop Jose Iglesias. Let’s take a look at Puig and Iglesias’s stats side-by-side.

Player

G

AB

H

2B

HR

RBI

BB

SO

BA

OBP

SLG

Puig

36

146

58

8

8

19

7

36

0.397

0.429

0.630

Iglesias

49

187

65

10

1

16

11

24

0.387

0.439

0.488

Without a doubt, Puig’s batting stats are better than Iglesias’s, but not by that much. The Dodgers rookie has hit for a lot more power in fewer games, but Iggy has more walks, fewer strikeouts and that’s given him a higher OBP, even though his batting average is lower. The ultimate comparison between the two hitting-wise is a park-adjusted runs above average stat. Puig checks in at 17.6 while Iglesias is at 11.7.

But the comparison doesn’t end there. We have to take into account fielding where Iglesias is as good as it gets. Anyone who has seen the Sox’s 22-year-old rookie play the field knows what a privilege it is to watch such mastery. He was touted in the Sox farm system as a player who couldn’t hit, but boy could he field. While his hitting has been a shock to everyone in the Sox organization, his fielding has been as advertised. That’s not to take anything away from Puig as well. He’s played some excellent defense across the outfield and has a great arm. But it’s about Iggy is up there with the best of them in the field. Unfortunately, the stats are tough to evaluate, because Iglesias has played more than half of the year at third base, a position he’s never played before.

Jose Iglesias is a wizard at SS.

Jose Iglesias is a wizard at SS.

The best fielding statistic we have right now is Ultimate Zone Rating (UZR)/150, which measures how many runs above average a player is for an entire season (measure as 150 games). At shortstop, Iglesias has a UZR/150 of 15.5, third in baseball for those who have played 150+ innings at the position*. At 3B, the numbers are really ugly. Iglesias’s UZR/150 there is -31.3, entirely because of his limited range at the position. Out of baseball third basemen, only Kevin Youkilis and Mark Reynolds have worse UZR/150. But is it really fair to judge a rookie at a position he’s never played before? Iglesias is a wizard at shortstop and would undoubtedly become a great defensive third basemen if he stayed at the position (which he won’t because of how good he is at SS). This skews Iggy’s defensive stats entirely so that his fielding value is -2.7. That’s massively unfair to one of the league’s best defensive players.

Puig has played almost entirely RF (290 out of 390 innings) and posted a UZR/150 of 3.4, slightly above-average. When his fielding value is calculated, it checks in at 0.3. Is Puig a better defensive player than Iglesias is (at their respective positions)? Certainly not. Any scout or baseball analyst will tell you that. With Iggy at a new position though, the statistics favor Puig.

Finally, we must factor in base running into the comparison, where neither is particularly good. Puig has stolen five bases and been caught three times while Iglesias has stolen two bases and been caught once. Statistically, both are below average on the base paths: Puig checking in at -1.2 and Iglesias at -1.7. Those numbers should improve as they both mature and spend more time in the league.

Having gone through offense, defense and base running, it’s time to add it all up with every baseball analyst’s favorite stat: Wins Above Replacement (WAR). WAR measures how many wins a player earns his team above a basic replacement level player. It’s a cumulative stat so Iggy has the advantage of having played more games. Nevertheless, Puig leads the Sox rookie 2.1 to 1.6 in this all-telling number. Of course, Iglesias’s defense, a major assets of is, has actually hurt him statistically this year because he’s playing a new position. If Iglesias had been at short all year, the gap would be much smaller or could even disappear.

Either way, neither is worthy of playing the All Star Game in New York. You have to play more than a quarter of the year to be deserving of that. But the next time you hear ESPN tout Puig as this wunderkind who’s saved the Dodgers season, take a look at Iglesias instead and see how he stacks up. The answer might surprise you.

(All stats from FanGraphs.com)

*BTW, in almost 200 innings last year, Iggy’s UZR/150 at SS was an astronomical 46.5. That’s how good he is.

Midday Links

I keep saying and failing to link to articles more. Here’s another try at it:

Enjoy!

When You’re in Office, Govern

Chris Cilliza wrote a post yesterday warning Democrats to be careful about changing the filibuster rules as Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is considering for nominations to cabinet and agency positions. He says that if Democrats change the rules now just for those positions, expect Republicans to take it a step further if they take control of the chamber in 2014:

But, politics works on the slippery slope principle. That means that if Democrats cross the line to change a rule to benefit them when they are in the majority, it sets a precedent for rule-changing that is not limited to filibusters on agency and cabinet nominees in future Senates — including those controlled by Republicans.

This may entirely be true, but I still think Harry Reid should go nuclear. Why? Because if the GOP takes control of the upper chamber in the midterm elections, they may change the rules anyway. Republicans have been clamoring for years about the oppressive regime of Barack Obama. If they keep the House and take the Senate next year, but Senate Democrats begin filibustering every piece of legislation, do you think they are just going to accept defeat as Democrats have? I’m very skeptical of that. The Tea Party base will rally in a hurry and demand that Republicans fix the filibuster. After all, Democratic obstruction in the Senate would just become an extension of the authoritarian stranglehold Obama has on the legislative process. Whether or not Reid decides to change the rules now, he should at least work under the expectation that Republicans are going to strongly consider changing the rules in the future anyways.

But there’s also a more simple reason to change the rules: when you’re in office, govern. I think it was Michael Grunwald who tweeted this a ways back (I can’t find it now), but it’s stuck with me. It’s why I think Democrats should (and have) compromised on immigration reform. When you have the presidency, use it. When you have the Senate, use it. President Obama has inexplicably been historically slow at nominating judges. That fault lies entirely on him (and Senator Leahy). The confirmation process has been just as slow. But there are other positions (NLRB spots, CFPB head Richard Cordray) that Republicans have filibustered simply because they don’t like the agencies. Sorry, that’s not how government works. If you don’t like an agency, pass legislation to amend it or abolish it. Don’t filibuster the heads of those departments to prevent them from operating. That’s just as illegal as President Obama’s regulatory end-around on the employer mandate.

The President took a chance in “recess” appointing his NLRB nominations and Cordray, but one court has already ruled that Obama overstepped his authority with the NLRB appointments and others will follow. That puts all of the agencies’ current actions in jeopardy. It’s long past time the GOP gave them an up or down vote. If the President cannot fill simple vacancies like these, then government cannot function. Republicans will just refuse to confirm the leaders of any agency they dislike. That’s not how government works and the Reid must finally stand up and say, “Enough is enough. Give us a vote or get out of our way. You can do what you when you’re in power and see what happens, but right now we have control.”

The NLRB and CFPB deserve to operate with the full-extent of their powers.

President Obama and Harry Reid should listen to Grunwald: When you’re in office, govern.