Batter's Box Interactive Magazine

Frequently-maligned Jay OF Vernon Wells is 32 today. According to the greatness that is BaseballReference.com, VW's "Most Similar" player through the age of 31 has been one Andre Nolan "Hawk" Dawson.

Not to paint TOO rosy of a picture, but the Hawk's age-32 season was 1987 -- that was his 49-homer NL MVP year. Just sayin' ...

Ah, to post, perchance to dream ...

Posted by Mick Doherty on Wednesday, December 08 2010 @ 11:24 AM EST.

Vernon & The Hawk | 32 comments | Create New Account

The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.

Mike Green - Wednesday, December 08 2010 @ 12:00 PM EST (#227106) #

Hawk was a much better hitter than Wells in his 20s, with the superficial similarity in the counting stats masking era differences. Oddly, one way in which the superficial similarity actually reflects a strength of Wells and a weakness of Dawson is in K rate. They struck out at roughly the same rate, but Wells is actually much better than Dawson in this respect. And that actually gives cause for (perhaps) some optimism. Wells may, if he focuses on his hitting rather than flychasing, be a more balanced hitter than Dawson. The club, alas, continues to insist that Wells will be the centerfielder in 2011.

Hawk did not have a nice resurgence in his early 30s with the Cubbies. I rush to add that this was as a right-fielder.

Mike Green - Wednesday, December 08 2010 @ 12:01 PM EST (#227107) #

Ack. Hawk did have a nice resurgence in his early 30s...

lexomatic - Wednesday, December 08 2010 @ 01:10 PM EST (#227110) #

people are forgetting that in 1987 Dawson went to the Cubs... and Wrigley. That means leaving turf (Montreal's... worst ever?) and the damage to his knees, to play on grass.
I think that's a huge factor. also more day games (maybe better visibility?)

christaylor - Wednesday, December 08 2010 @ 02:15 PM EST (#227115) #

Vernon Wells is a difficult player to evaluate -- how much of his poor performance since 2006 has been the result of injury? '06, '08, '10 -- were all seasons that were at least good, the contract just has to be accepted as a sunk cost.

It wouldn't surprise me if Vernon posts OPS+ of 110-120 for the rest of his deal. For CF that's valuable, but then again maybe he's not an asset in CF anymore. If he can put up seasons like last year, that's valuable for a corner OF.

Then again, it also wouldn't surprise me if he got hurt again and fell of the table... and never posted an OPS+ of over 85 again.

His play, his stats, all scream "must stay healthy" to me. He is what he is and probably take too much flack from the fan base.

TamRa - Wednesday, December 08 2010 @ 02:42 PM EST (#227117) #

I can't imagine what kind of calculation doesn't have his most similar match as Joe Carter.

Will have to look again when i get a chance.

Dave Till - Wednesday, December 08 2010 @ 03:02 PM EST (#227118) #

I just looked: according to Baseball Reference, his top comps are Dawson, Reggie Smith, Bobby Murcer, George Bell and Raul Mondesi. I used to think of him and Carter as close comparisons - they have similar body types, for one thing - but Wells has been consistently better.

I've always thought that Wells has a perfect temperament for the game. He didn't seem to let success go to his head, and he kept plugging away even when he was considered The Most Overpaid Player In The History Of Baseball Ever. He's not a superstar, and perhaps even isn't a star, but he was one of the ten best power threats in the AL this past year. And he can still play centre field, even if he doesn't play it well any more (compare him to Fred Lewis, for example). He doesn't deserve all of that money, and he probably won't put up his 2010 numbers again, but he won't be a liability out there. And he seems to be a decent person, too. I've always been a huge fan of his, and I still am. With Doc gone, Delgado long gone, and even Marcum gone, Wells is the last connection to the Jays' past (he played 24 games for the team in the previous millennium).

One other thing about Wells' salary: it's so high now because a lot of his seven-year deal was backloaded. He made $3,687,500 in 2008, which was 10th on the club in payroll, behind (among others) Gregg Zaun and David Eckstein. In 2009, he made $4,687,500, which ranked him sixth on the club. He's going to make a whole lot of money, but he's had to wait for it.

Mike Green - Wednesday, December 08 2010 @ 03:27 PM EST (#227119) #

Carter's OPS+ through age 31 was 109. Wells' is 108. They share the aversion to the base on balls, and the tendency to pop up.

Jeremy - Wednesday, December 08 2010 @ 03:33 PM EST (#227121) #

Mick...shouldn't that last line read "49 homer, Cubs-finish-last NL MVP year?" The Cubbies finished last in the division in '87; they didn't win the NL East until '89.

Or am I being whooshed?

Mick Doherty - Wednesday, December 08 2010 @ 04:40 PM EST (#227127) #

Why, Jeremy ... whatever are you referring to. sir?

(Seamless live edit tools so rock.)

TamRa - Wednesday, December 08 2010 @ 05:51 PM EST (#227132) #

I used to think of him and Carter as close comparisons - they have similar body types, for one thing - but Wells has been consistently better.
......
Carter's OPS+ through age 31 was 109. Wells' is 108. They share the aversion to the base on balls, and the tendency to pop up.

Carter, through age 29, in 3545 PA, had a 110 OPS+, 151 homers, 531 RBI, 169 walks, 537 K's - .268 - .307 - .468 - .776

At age 30 he stunk to the tune of an 85 OPS+ amd at 31 he bounced back to 124

Through age 29, in 4633 PA, Vernon's OPS+ was 110, he had 177 homers and 659 RBI, 308 walks and 592 K's - .283 - .332 - .480 - .812

At 30 he put up an 86 OPS+ and at 1 he bounced back for a 127

Essentially, Wells walks more, Carter ran more. But still, it's spooky.

I can't figure out how Carter can not even be on the list.

bpoz - Wednesday, December 08 2010 @ 06:06 PM EST (#227134) #

TamRa that is good stuff. So Wells has better numbers, I would not have believed it. Thanks.
There are negative viewpoints on Wells so I cannot ask how their defense compares. I will just assume equal. But a strong lineup getting the job done when you don't, really protected Carter from criticism.

92-93 - Wednesday, December 08 2010 @ 06:54 PM EST (#227135) #

He made $3,687,500 in 2008, which was 10th on the club in payroll, behind (among others) Gregg Zaun and David Eckstein. In 2009, he made $4,687,500, which ranked him sixth on the club. He's going to make a whole lot of money, but he's had to wait for it.

Not sure why you'd exclude the signing bonus - Vernon was paid 9m in '08 and 10m in '09. Rogers may spread the 25.5m bonus over all 7 years for accounting purposes but Vernon was due 8.5m in March of 2008-2010.

I thought this was an interesting comparison :

Travis Snider, 20, AA - 98g 362ab .267/.352/.461 65r 21 doubles 0 triples 17hr 67rbi 116k 52bb 1:1sb
Brett Lawrie, 20, AA - 135g 554ab .285/.346/.451 90r 36 doubles 16 triples 8hr 63rbi 118k 47bb 30:13sb

The only hitter under 23 who posted a better OPS than Lawrie in the Southern League this year was 21 year old Alex Liddi, an international signee who had the benefit of significantly more professional experience. Liddi played two full seasons at A and one at A+ before moving to AA, whereas Lawrie spent one at A and skipped A+. Lawrie's OPS was 130 points higher than Liddi's in the Midwest League, and that's despite the fact Liddi was repeating the level. In otherwords, Lawrie was probably the best prospect bat in the entire league, and may in fact be a more athletic version of Travis Snider.

Jbar - Wednesday, December 08 2010 @ 08:56 PM EST (#227141) #

Always appreciate a good Shakespeare allusion when discussing baseball. Well played.

John Northey - Wednesday, December 08 2010 @ 08:57 PM EST (#227142) #

The main reason Carter wouldn't be on Vern's most similar is due to the spread in raw stats. If you go by OPS+ boy do they match nicely though. So in a couple of years we'll be cheering as Vernon hits a home run to win it all? :)

Magpie - Thursday, December 09 2010 @ 12:36 AM EST (#227153) #

There are negative viewpoints on Wells so I cannot ask how their defense compares.

Carter was never as good an outfielder as Wells. Carter was a decent enough corner outfielder, who was stretched to cover centre field (although teams did try it with, most notably the Padres.) Carter's great virtue as a defender was his versatility - not to mention his complete willingness, even when he was a big star, to switch positions in mid-season and switch back the next year if necessary. With the Jays Carter went from one corner to the other depending on whether it was Darrin Jackson or Candy Maldonado at the other corner - he moved to first base on occasion so Winfield could play the field. Earlier in his career, Cleveland was able to platoon LF Mel Hall with 1b Pat Tabler by moving Carter back and forth between the two spots.

Magpie - Thursday, December 09 2010 @ 01:06 AM EST (#227159) #

Just for fun...

christaylor - Thursday, December 09 2010 @ 05:32 AM EST (#227162) #

I think the comparison is interesting in light of Lawrie's recent comments about wanting to crack the Jays starting line-up in 2010. Almost definitely not going to happen, despite the, um, confidence.

Curious -- does anyone know about the home park Lawrie played in last year? I keep hearing that he he has average speed, but 16 triples (and hence the bump to his SLG) speak against that. I'd be curious to know whether those 3B were shots that'd be HR in a more neutral environment (to say nothing of the PCL) or whether he was stretching 2B in to 3B (and 1B into 2B) and Lawrie's speed/base-running are better than the general word on him.

Those CS numbers say he really should be running less often...

BalzacChieftain - Thursday, December 09 2010 @ 08:37 AM EST (#227169) #

@christaylor

Don't have time to find the link this morning, but when AA was asked a similar question, he reflected that Lawrie has good speed, but not necesasrily great instincts or quick acceleration, hence his possible move to the OF from the infield. IMO, taking that into account, he could probably get a lot of triples based on speed alone, but would have a hard time stealing bases.

BalzacChieftain - Thursday, December 09 2010 @ 08:39 AM EST (#227170) #

*necessarily. Weak keyboard fingers in the early morning hours.

Jonny German - Thursday, December 09 2010 @ 09:17 AM EST (#227174) #

Just for fun...

Duly entertained, thanks!

I'm sure Magpie knows this off the top of his head, but for the rest of us... the home plate is Dana DeMuth.

Moe - Thursday, December 09 2010 @ 09:26 AM EST (#227175) #

Seeing the contracts handed out this offseason, VW's remaining 4/86 are still high but no longer crazy. Not saying the contract was a good idea, it clearly wasn't. But considering that VW hasn't earned that much money so far (40m over the past 4 years), the overall picture looks a bit better with the rebounding salaries.

Of course, the team would be better if they had traded him after the 06 season but there is a chance that when we look back after 2014 the contract didn't sink the team like we assumed it the past offseason. 4/40 during a weak market and 4/86 during what looks to be a strong market period. Still a lot of money and an overpayment but not a club killer anymore if he produces 2.5-3 WAR going forward.

ayjackson - Thursday, December 09 2010 @ 01:16 PM EST (#227225) #

Those CS numbers say he really should be running less often.

Looks about break-even to me.

braden - Thursday, December 09 2010 @ 03:34 PM EST (#227242) #

See, Mitch had Carter's number!

Timbuck2 - Friday, December 10 2010 @ 11:00 AM EST (#227302) #

See, Mitch had Carter's number!

Whenever I see numbers like that I always think that the hitter is due....

Matthew E - Friday, December 10 2010 @ 11:24 AM EST (#227303) #

The thing about the '93 Series was, Mitch Williams had a long history of falling flat on his face against the Jays, going back to when he was with the Rangers. So I wasn't worried to see him come into the game; I knew he could be had. And, sure enough, the Jays raked him over the coals in both Games 4 and 6. Sorry, Phillies; might have worked against a different opponent.

uglyone - Friday, December 10 2010 @ 04:13 PM EST (#227328) #

Career:

CF V.Wells: .346wOBA
LF C.Crawford: .347wOBA

Contract:

CF V.Wells: $21.5m/4yrs
LF C.Crawford: $20.2m/7yrs

Crawford has been unable to play CF, while Wells would likely be an excellent defensive LF. And Crawford's greatest assets are those that will most likely deteriorate faster with age.

Yet Crawford = "great signing", while Wells = "worst contract in baseball".

Parker - Sunday, December 12 2010 @ 06:24 PM EST (#227436) #

A couple things to keep in mind when comparing these contracts:

-Wells was under team control for one more season when he signed his contract while Crawford was a free agent

-Crawford had several teams competing to sign him, while the Jays were competing only against their prediction of Wells' market value as a free agent IF he kept playing at the same level

I think a lot of the reason people hate the Wells signing so much is that the Jays didn't even have to offer that contract when they did. They must've thought Wells was going to get even better, as it otherwise would've made more sense to wait until his existing contract expired to begin negotiations. I'm not sure what led the Jays to believe he was going to get better as he was at his peak age-wise, and wasn't exactly consistent in his production year-to-year.

For the record, I think the Crawford signing is a terrible move as well, but the Red Sox payroll is in a much better position to absorb the cost than the Jays' is.

bpoz - Monday, December 13 2010 @ 10:00 AM EST (#227452) #

I never liked the Delgado or Wells contracts because I saw them as too large a % of the total payroll. I don't KNOW who is responsible for those contracts, i have heard Ash,JP & Godfrey. Right now I believe that Godfrey is the one responsible and personally I strongly believe blame & credit should be attached to the individual responsible.

Managers take so much heat for their actions and eventually get fired due to bad results. IMO very unfair.

I hope AA, Farrell & the player development theme gets a long rope to bear fruit. I buy into it.

Chuck - Monday, December 13 2010 @ 10:34 AM EST (#227453) #

a long rope to bear fruit

Consider your metaphors mixed, sir.

Magpie - Monday, December 13 2010 @ 11:26 AM EST (#227458) #

Yeah, I hear those two words in close proximity and Billie Holiday starts going through my head...

TamRa - Monday, December 13 2010 @ 11:32 PM EST (#227499) #

Yet Crawford = "great signing", while Wells = "worst contract in baseball".

To be fair, most of the same people who like the Crawford deal now were NOT calling the Wells deal a bad contract when it was signed.

I do disagree with the idea that Boston can better absorb the Crawford deal than jays' ownership can - there's a difference in being UNABLE to handle a deal (as the Rangers were unable to handle A-Rod's deal when their owner's fortunes went south) and being UNWILLING to raise the payroll.

Rogers can/could have at any time simply said "everything over $10 mil of Vernon's deal is "off the books" as far as salary goes (i.e., an expense they would eat but not money that would be available for payroll if Wells suddenly retired) and hardly missed a beat. whether or not they would choose to (and frankly, they ate a bunch of money on Ryan and swallowed a noticeable chunk to complete the Halladay deal so who can say tey wouldn't do that?)

The jays have, ofr all practical purposes, the market and the resources of the Red Sox and have had all along save perhaps during the regretable Interbrew episode.

uglyone - Tuesday, December 14 2010 @ 12:18 AM EST (#227504) #

the argument that Boston can better absorb that kind of contract is relatively meaningless when we remember that much of the criticism of the Wells deal was that it made him "untradeable" - even to teams like the Yanks and Boston, who are now apparently able to "absorb" that kind of deal.

Vernon & The Hawk | 32 comments | Create New Account

The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.