Luis Valbuena: Not Very Good

In Commentary And Analysis by myles57 Comments

In a few days, the Cubs will open regular season play with Luis Valbuena at 3B. Compared to the other options the Cubs have, he isn't that bad. Compared to other 3B, it's really bad.

The first thing I looked at when analyzing Valbuena's last season was to look at his BABIP. It was low last year, at .260. That gives you the impression he's bound to get luckier next season and regress to the mean…right? Unfortunately, that's not how it really works. Valbuena's career BABIP is .269. He's likely unlucky, but over 1109 PA you can start to be reasonably confident that he's never going to have an outstanding BABIP. He likely just makes poor contact; his true talent level is probably .280 to .290.

Even if he did have a BABIP of .300 last year, his line would translate (assuming his extra hits are seeing-eye singles) from .219/.310/.340 to .251/.338/.371. That's certainly a much better line, but still a poor one for a third baseman. .371 would be good for 34th among players with 200 more PA and 50 games at 3B, right behind Brandon Inge. We'd have to give him 3 more doubles (so 1/3 of his "found" hits) just to tie him with Brandon. His ISO is 32nd as well. He just doesn't have the bat to hack it at the corner.

It's not all bad for Luis. He can play 2b reasonably, and he can even play shortstop in a pinch. His bat is much more suited to play at 2B, where he doesn't need to hit the cover off the ball to be productive. Unfortunately, that's not where he's needed on the Cubs. Instead, he's a punchless threat that needs hit-luck just to be bad offensively (and that luck isn't all that likely to come: a .280 BABIP provides a translational .235/.324/.355) from a position that almost demands more power than that. Cubs fans have to hope that Lake takes a serious step forward and takes the position from Valbuena in the second half of 2013, because Luis is just not the answer at the hot corner. 

A side note on positional value adjustments:

I try to break the positions into 2 equal groups: offensive and defensive positions. The 4 positions up the middle of the infield (C, 2B, SS, CF) are way harder to field adequately. You can be bad at the plate and good on the field and still be average. In contrast, the outer positions (1B, 3B, LF, RF) are much easier to field, so the offensive burden is much greater. Even if you are league-average offensively, you're a below-average player if you field any of these positions (unless you are absolutely stellar in the field – even then, the amount of defensive value you can provide is limited). This is why Darwin Barney at 2B can be an adequate player with a .300 OBP while Valbuena at 3B would be a poor one even at a .338 OBP (Barney also plays sublime defense at 2B while Valbuena is merely good at 3B, and likely average to below-average at 2B).

This is also a useful tool in explaining why it's so good to have a player like Starlin Castro. The theoretically average team would have 4 good hitters and 4 bad ones, given how positions are. Castro is a good offensive player from the defensive spectrum, which is historically uncommon (CF are really good right now, historically. SS were up 10 years ago. This things ebb and flow). That allows us to add a threat that the average team won't have (or masks a weakness we might have from a traditional "power position"). DeJesus can also add that to our team if he can make it defensively in center (I don't think he can, but he'll get every chance to). Unfortunately, the Cubs squander that by taking a bath at 3B and RF, so we end up at even anyways…

Share this Post

Comments

  1. GW

    SVB wrote:

    The Tigers will open the season with a closer by committee. It just won’t include their closer of the future.

    I picked up Benoit off waivers Sunday night. I think that someone will have the exclusive job by May 1st (at the latest). Usually when a committee is declared, the first guy to get two saves in a row (3 max) is handed the job.

    In recent memory, the 2012 Giants are the only team I can think of to stick with a committee, and that was only after santiago casilla went down. (They also seem deathly afraid to overuse Sergio Romo for some reason).

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  2. Berselius

    His bat is much more suited to play at 2B, where he doesn’t need to hit the cover off the ball to be productive.

    IIRC the positional adjustments for 2b and 3b are the same

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  3. GW

    @ SVB:

    Unfortunately, you can’t do it that way. Not just because of injuries, but because of changes during the year. A team that has 3 guys with greater than 10 saves won’t be all that uncommon, but that doesn’t mean that there was a committee at any point in the year. The typical managerial school of thought is “this guy is our closer” and trots him out at every opportunity (except for the third day in a row, or 5th time in 7 days) until he loses two in a row, or three out of five, at which point he is replaced. A committee is when a team sticks with multiple options over a span of time (say greater than two weeks). And that is exceedingly rare, as any serious fantasy player can tell you.

    Often declared, seldom stuck with.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  4. dmick89

    GW wrote:

    Often declared, seldom stuck with.

    Yeah, and I agree that by May 1st the Tigers will have chosen a closer. If they haven’t done so by then it’s because they’ve blown several 9th inning leads.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  5. dmick89

    You can argue that 2B and 3B are the same. I think you can also argue that 2B/SS/CF are more demanding than the other non-catcher positions. Technically, the defensive spectrum was this: (C) – SS – 2B – CF – 3B -LF – RF – 1B (I think).

    I’m fine if someone says it’s (C) – SS – CF/2B/3B – LF/RF – 1B

    I’m fine if you just group them as Myles did.

    If you’re going to run numbers and do that kind of analysis, you should be exact, but otherwise I’m OK with just about anything that makes a distinction between the middle of the field positions and corner positions.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  6. dmick89

    @ GW:
    I saw that thread yesterday and didn’t understand it. I don’t know why he does that stuff. It’s not nearly as bad as MGL, but it’s annoying.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  7. josh

    Were there any other options at 3B this off season? What 3B would you guys target in a trade? I can’t even think of anyone good off the top of my head, except Zimmerman and Longo, but those guys aren’t going anywhere.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  8. Suburban kid

    Just saw the Cubs odds on winning the division are twenty-fucking-five to one and the over/under on wins in 72.5.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  9. Author
    Myles

    Suburban kid wrote:

    Just saw the Cubs odds on winning the division are twenty-fucking-five to one and the over/under on wins in 72.5.

    They must not have saw we re-signed team MVP Shawn Camp or something

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  10. josh

    No, its possible if the young untouchables play very well and they minimize the damage Valbuena et al can do to them.

    And really, Castro, Rizzo and Samarj are the only ones who have a good chance of playing well, so I guess its possible they have a middling season.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  11. GW

    paul goldschmidt —> 5/32

    he wouldn’t have been arbitration eligible until after next season. the deal includes a 1/14.5 club option for 2018.

    (possible rizzo comp, fwiw, if anyone gives a flying fuck)

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  12. Author
    Myles

    GW wrote:

    paul goldschmidt —> 5/32
    he wouldn’t have been arbitration eligible until after next season. the deal includes a 1/14.5 club option for 2018.
    (possible rizzo comp, fwiw, if anyone gives a flying fuck)

    I think that’s a good move for Arizona, and Rizzo might grab a touch more. I don’t think the Cubs are hurrying to extend Rizzo, but those talks will probably happen at the end of this year.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  13. GW

    @ Myles:

    if i’m reading it right, the only free agent year bought is the club option in 2018.

    rizzo is also about two years younger. i would prefer the cubs wait a little longer and perhaps lock up another free agent season, i think.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  14. GW

    @ GBTS:

    they mentioned wanting to limit his innings as a factor in the decision, but with a couple guys slated return to their rotation midseason (Luebke, Weiland), and the other options they have on the roster (Bass, Ross), seems like they could have more easily started him in the rotation and removed him later.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0

Leave a Comment