Drew Stubbs: What if?

[M2]

Stubbs is hitting the wall he always was going to hit. There really isn't any "what if?" with him as his flaws were always clearly visible, not to mention intractable. He can't hit RHPs to save himself (a problem that dogged him in the minors). He's .233/.306/.364 for his career vs. RHPs. If he grips and rips, his OB plummets and his SLG still is fairly bad. If he slaps for contact, his SLG plummets and his OB still is fairly bad. He's also not an all-world fielder, which removes the Cesar Geronimo argument for playing him as a regular.

And you can't claim bad luck for him this season. The league average BABIP is .299. Ryan Ludwick is at .297 and Jay Bruce is at .292 and somehow they've managed to be super productive. The long-term problem with Stubbs isn't bad luck in 2012, it's that even with flat out good luck in 2010-11 he still wasn't good. Give Jay Bruce a .340 BABIP and he wins an MVP award.

Ultimately he's a platoon CF who can give you speed on the bench and come in as a defensive sub (not necessarily in CF) late in a game. That's his game. CF is the most glaring position on the team in need of upgrade. There's no hiding it. I'm sure most people wish Jocketty had been able to find that upgrade this summer, but it didn't happen. It will be the top priority this winter.

In the meantime the Reds would be wise to limit his exposure to RHPs - move him down the lineup or, better yet, play someone else. And when he's at the plate, let him swing with some malice. Nothing's going to stop him from striking out or make him a high OB player, but maybe he can goose his HR/FB ratio.

[757690]

And you can't claim bad luck for him this season. The league average BABIP is .299. Ryan Ludwick is at .297 and Jay Bruce is at .292 and somehow they've managed to be super productive. The long-term problem with Stubbs isn't bad luck in 2012, it's that even with flat out good luck in 2010-11 he still wasn't good. Give Jay Bruce a .340 BABIP and he wins an MVP award.

BABIP varies greatly hitter to hitter, with most speed guys having very high ones, around .325-.350. So it's not wrong to think that Stubbs could bounce back next year with a much higher BABIP. In fact, historical evidence suggests that he should.

[RollyInRaleigh]

I may be one of the few, but I still see some hope in Drew Stubbs. Nothing I can quantify, but I'm not quite ready to give up on him.

[Brutus]

I may be one of the few, but I still see some hope in Drew Stubbs. Nothing I can quantify, but I'm not quite ready to give up on him.

I could definitely see it if he gets traded to the Blue Jays in the offseason.

[M2]

BABIP varies greatly hitter to hitter, with most speed guys having very high ones, around .325-.350. So it's not wrong to think that Stubbs could bounce back next year with a much higher BABIP. In fact, historical evidence suggests that he should.

Maybe, though Stubbs doesn't have the plate approach of most speed guys. He's not slapping and dashing. Don't know what his standard time to first base is, but with an off balance swing and a set of long legs combined with him hitting RH, I wouldn't expect it to be anything exceptional. Stubbs has the highest GB/FB ratio of his career this season and it's not translating into more hits. I agree with those who think it's the wrong approach for him. I just also think there really isn't a truly right approach for him given his limitations.

Even at his very best, Stubbs had a BA of .160-.170 on balls hit to the infield. The difference between that and his current .133 mark is about 5-6 hits over the course of a season. So I'm not sure what his speed is actually worth in this instance. In Stubbs' case I suspect his hitting approach will have more to do with any BABIP volatility.

[757690]

Maybe, though Stubbs doesn't have the plate approach of most speed guys. He's not slapping and dashing. Don't know what his standard time to first base is, but with an off balance swing and a set of long legs combined with him hitting RH, I wouldn't expect it to be anything exceptional. Stubbs has the highest GB/FB ratio of his career this season and it's not translating into more hits. I agree with those who think it's the wrong approach for him. I just also think there really isn't a truly right approach for him given his limitations.

Even at his very best, Stubbs had a BA of .160-.170 on balls hit to the infield. The difference between that and his current .133 mark is about 5-6 hits over the course of a season. So I'm not sure what his speed is actually worth in this instance. In Stubbs' case I suspect his hitting approach will have more to do with any BABIP volatility.

Never understood the whole "it's only a few extra hits" argument. The difference between a .300 hitter and a .265 hitter is around a hit a week. Extra hits are extra hits. Anyway, his speed causes more than just hits to the infield, it causes the defense to play in and results in more hits through the infield.

More precisely, Stubbs' career BABIP is .325. It's been between .320 and .345 every year before this year. It's .290 this season The more reason to think it will be back to near his career average than this season's.

[M2]

Never understood the whole "it's only a few extra hits" argument. The difference between a .300 hitter and a .265 hitter is around a hit a week. Extra hits are extra hits. Anyway, his speed causes more than just hits to the infield, it causes the defense to play in and results in more hits through the infield.

More precisely, Stubbs' career BABIP is .325. It's been between .320 and .345 every year before this year. It's .290 this season The more reason to think it will be back to near his career average than this season's.

And if we were talking about a hit a week I'd agree with you. However, we're talking about five or six hits over a season if Stubbs is able to post a (slightly high) BA on balls hit in the infield, and that's not going to fundamentally change the problem that is Drew Stubbs.

I also don't know that there's any need to play in with Stubbs at the plate because, as I mentioned before, he's so off balance after his swing that I doubt his time to first bast is a reason for concern. It certainly doesn't seem other teams are playing in for him.

Stubbs' hasn't been around long enough to know where his BABIP is going to settle. I remember the argument that the real Corey Lidle is a guy with a low BABIP from Oakland so disregard that last season in Toronto. For all we know Stubbs has had his best BABIP seasons and he'll be regressing to a lower norm from here on out. We've seen it happen with Jeff Francouer, who posted .337 BABIPs in two of his first three seasons and is now down to a .299 career mark (and he's plenty fast even though he doesn't steal a lot of bases).

And even with a relatively high BABIP Stubbs still was a poor offensive player vs. RHPs. So I'm not seeing where the payoff is in sticking with Stubbs as an everyday player into next season. It's really just degrees of how poor he is at the plate vs. RHPs.

[dman]

Been pondering this since you started this thread,and I don't know why, but a comparison of what Drew Stubbs is now and what Nick Esasky was during his tenure with the Reds kept coming to mind. I get so aggravated with Stubbs and on some days would love nothing more than to see him become some other teams project. And that's where the Esasky comparison came to me. As soon as Nick left Cincinnati, it seemed as though his talent started to really swing around, and who knows where he would've ended up at were it not for his vertigo issues. I worry that once Drew Stubbs is no longer a Red, that somebody will capitalize on his talent and really be able to bring him around to what we all know he's capable of being. Obviously, the problem being, how long can the Reds keep wasting space in the lineup with him if he never comes around? Here are their numbers for comparison. I'm no Stat Rat, but looking at their numbers, they seemed close enough to be able to be a fairly similar comparison.

Nick Esasky:

1983 23 CIN NL 85 335 302 41 80 10 5 12 46 6 2 27 99 .265 .328 .450 .779 112 136 5 3 0 3 1 5
1984 24 CIN NL 113 382 322 30 62 10 5 10 45 1 2 52 103 .193 .301 .348 .649 79 112 6 0 3 5 3 53
1985 25 CIN NL 125 464 413 61 108 21 0 21 66 3 4 41 102 .262 .332 .465 .797 118 192 9 4 3 3 3 573
1986 26 CIN NL 102 383 330 35 76 17 2 12 41 0 2 47 97 .230 .325 .403 .728 97 133 8 1 1 4 0 37/5
1987 27 CIN NL 100 378 346 48 94 19 2 22 59 0 0 29 76 .272 .327 .529 .856 119 183 10 0 2 1 3 3/57
1988 28 CIN NL 122 450 391 40 95 17 2 15 62 7 2 48 104 .243 .327 .412 .738 108 161 6 4 0 7 4 *3
1989 29 BOS AL 154 633 564 79 156 26 5 30 108 1 2 66 117 .277 .355 .500 .855 133 282 11 3 0 0 9 *3/7 MVP-18
1990 30 ATL NL 9 39 35 2 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 14 .171 .256 .171 .428 18 6 0 0 0 0 0 /3
8 Yrs 810 3064 2703 336 677 120 21 122 427 18 14 314 712 .250 .329 .446 .775 111 1205 55 15 9 23 23
162 Game Avg. 162 613 541 67 135 24 4 24 85 4 3 63 142 .250 .329 .446 .775 111 241 11 3 2 5 5


Drew Stubbs:

2009 24 CIN NL 42 196 180 27 48 5 1 8 17 10 4 15 49 .267 .323 .439 .762 99 79 1 0 1 0 0 8
2010 25 CIN NL 150 583 514 91 131 19 6 22 77 30 6 55 168 .255 .329 .444 .773 105 228 6 5 3 6 2 *8
2011 26 CIN NL 158 681 604 92 147 22 3 15 44 40 10 63 205 .243 .321 .364 .686 86 220 2 7 6 1 1 *8
2012 27 CIN NL 122 498 449 71 96 13 2 14 39 29 6 40 146 .214 .280 .345 .626 64 155 2 2 6 1 0 *8
4 Yrs 472 1958 1747 281 422 59 12 59 177 109 26 173 568 .242 .314 .390 .704 87 682 11 14 16 8 3
162 Game Avg. 162 672 600 96 145 20 4 20 61 37 9 59 195 .242 .314 .390 .704 87 234 4 5 5 3 1

[M2]

Esasky had a 106 OPS+ with the Reds and a .867 minor league OPS. Stubbs, with an 87 OPS+ and .762 minor league OPS, doesn't really have the same sort of latent offensive potential that Esasky did. In Esasky's case, it was frustrating waiting for the full realization of something that was there and that he regularly teased. In Stubbs' case, people are waiting for him to become a wholly different player at the plate. The much simpler explanation of Stubbs is we're not seeing what isn't there.

I'd say Stubbs is more Eddie Milner than Nick Esasky, with the unfortunate twist that Stubbs doesn't hit LH like Milner.

[dman]

Esasky had a 106 OPS+ with the Reds and a .867 minor league OPS. Stubbs, with an 87 OPS+ and .762 minor league OPS, doesn't really have the same sort of latent offensive potential that Esasky did. In Esasky's case, it was frustrating waiting for the full realization of something that was there and that he regularly teased. In Stubbs' case, people are waiting for him to become a wholly different player at the plate. The much simpler explanation of Stubbs is we're not seeing what isn't there.

I'd say Stubbs is more Eddie Milner than Nick Esasky, with the unfortunate twist that Stubbs doesn't hit LH like Milner.

Eddie Milner and Drew Stubbs is a very fair and comparable comparison.

[gilpdawg]

Eddie Milner and Drew Stubbs is a very fair and comparable comparison.

Hopefully not including the off the field problems.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

[Tadasimha]

I may be one of the few, but I still see some hope in Drew Stubbs. Nothing I can quantify, but I'm not quite ready to give up on him.

I could definitely see it if he gets traded to the Blue Jays in the offseason.

It would not shock me in a couple of seasons to see Stubbs mentioned as the latest version of Jose Bautista or Edwin Encarnacion.

I don't think it will happen with the Reds unless some changes are made in the hitting instruction.

[redsmetz]

Here's my immediate dream viz Drew Stubbs - he hits the game winning home run to clinch the division title. Of course, we'd have to get back home for it to be as dramatic as Jay Bruce's in 2010 and I don't think we'll have to wait for the homestand.

[lollipopcurve]

I think there are some good seasons left in Stubbs -- potentially. He's had major league success before. Right now it's not so much a matter of pitchers "figuring something out" about him -- everything they do seems to work. He's just royally screwed up in terms of his approach and his confidence. If/when he has some success with a given approach, his confidence will rise and he may be able to maintain that over most of a season. I don't know if Cincy is the place, though. Sometimes a change of scene can trigger a rejuvenation, and it seems as if he may have tried everything else at this point, at least in his head.

[RollyInRaleigh]

Maybe he can go "all David Freese" in the postseason this year. Could open up all kinds of options.