Yes, Brett Gardner is as Good as Jason Bay

Written by Greg Fertel | 16 December 2009

In looking for the best option in left field for the Yankees, I discovered that Brett Gardner actually projects to be more valuable in 2010 than Jason Bay. Given that Jason Bay is one of the biggest-name free agents out there, I doubt that this sentiment is very common. Now, Bay and Gardner aren't very similar players. Bay is a slugger who will hit in the middle of the order, while a hitter like Gardner will be hidden in the 9-hole.

Maybe you think that it doesn't make sense to compare two players who are so different, but production is production, no matter where it comes from, so I don't see an issue there. I figured it was worth an entire post and a little more analysis to verify or debunk my recent conclusion. That is what the scientific method is all about, isn't it?

Hitting

In my original post, I used CHONE to compare the two hitters. It can't hurt to bring more projection systems into play with the comparison, so it's definitely worth seeing how the other systems rate the two. Obviously, Bay has a huge lead here, that most people would think is insurmountable.

CHONE has Jason Bay as 27 runs better than Gardner over the course of 150 games.

CAIRO projects that Jason Bay will produce 20 more offensive runs than Gardner over 650 plate appearances.

ZiPS is much more pessimistic for Gardner and projects him as well below average. This results in Bay getting an offensive edge of 42 runs per 650 PA.

The Bill James projection system really likes Gardner and only gives Bay an 18 run advantage over 650 PA.

The Fans' Projections at FanGraphs predict a 29 run difference between the two after 650 PA.

There was no doubt that Gardner wasn't close to the hitter that Jason Bay is, but the systems do not agree with how close their bats are. ZiPS is the major outlier and thinks Gardner will be well below average. CAIRO and Bill James both like Gardner and only see a two win offensive difference between the players. If you wanted to average all of the systems together, Bay comes out as ahead at +27 -- equal to what CHONE predicted.

Defense

Defense is where Brett Gardner makes his charge to even the playing field with Bay. Gardner hasn't had that much professional experience, but has really shone in his limited time. The fans really like him, and UZR has loved him so far. On the other hand, Jason Bay is rated poorly by all systems.

With Gardner, we have nearly zero data for him in left field, so I thought it made more sense to use his center field numbers. On average, a player moving from center to a corner-spot is ten runs better in the field. I think it's fair to expect an improvement out of Gardner in left field, and don't think it's far-fetched to predict he'll be as good as the top defensive left fielder, Carl Crawford.

I used Jeff Zimmerman's projections in my original post, and it resulted in a 29 run swing in Gardner's favor. Lucky for us, there are other projection systems available too. CAIRO surprisingly projects a +17 UZR/150 for Gardner in center field, so I don't think there has been necessary regression done there. The projection for Bay is -10, in line with Zimmerman's number.

CAIRO also projects regular old Zone Rating (ZR) and pegs Gardner as a +7 CF and Jason Bay as a -7 LF.

CHONE projects the two using TotalZone and doesn't think Bay is as bad as the other systems; it expects a -4 run season out of him. CHONE projects Gardner as a +4 center fielder. The Fans seem to think Gardner will play all three outfield positions and will be around ten runs above average in somewhat limited playing time. They expect Bay to play LF full time and be worth -12 runs.

Any way you slice it, Gardner comes out well ahead of Bay in defensive prowess. If you take Bay's most optimistic projection and Gardner's most pessimistic projection(+10 for LF adjustment), the difference is still 18 runs between the two. Even this mark would go a long way in making up for their offensive differences.

Baserunning

I don't know of any baserunning projections out there, so I created my own Marcel-like projections. I weighted the past three seasons 5-4-3 and included some regression. Because Gardner didn't play in 2007, I used league average for that year. No aging factor was included.

This resulted in Gardner as a +5 baserunner, and Bay as about a +1 baserunner. If I had decided to include Gardner's AAA stats in 2008, he would have projected for nearly 7 runs above average on the bases.

Who's Better?

Most of these systems give Gardner a slight edge. Taking the most pessimistic options for Gardner out of all three sections results in Jason Bay being two wins better than Gardner over the course of a season. Is that possible? Sure. Is it likely? Not according to all of the other systems; The rest all think the players will be about equal, or have Gardner superior.

At first it was hard for me to grasp this, but it really does make sense; Gardner's advantages in baserunning and defense really are big enough to make up for his hitting shortcomings. Unless you use the most pessimistic projection for Gardner, it looks like he'll be the better player in 2010. Now if only the Yankees would realize this and hand him a starting job...