Coco Crisp Anyone?

[Brutus]

The reason why you need around 1000 AB's to know what a player's true skill level is because usually around then, he will have faced every type of pitcher, and every type of situation multiple times.

Heisey has mostly played against fastball pitchers, because he struggles against most off-speed stuff, especially from RH pitching. Play him everyday, against everyone, and his numbers will likely plummet.

Funny thing is, his career splits suggest exactly the opposite.

B-Ref's career splits show that only 221 of his career plate appearances have come against pitchers considered "power" pitchers (with a .657 OPS). Against finesse pitchers, he's had an .856 OPS among 334 PAs.

That's roughly one quarter of his career plate appearances against power pitchers. Know what's interesting? The NL total splits this year profiles just shy of one quarter of all plate appearances being against "power" pitchers.

So that means not only is the perception of Heisey's struggles not backed up by stats, but his proportion of who he's been facing is right in line with the rest of the league -- meaning he's not benefiting from being utilized any special way according to his strengths.

[mth123]

I'd be interested in Crisp if the price is right and if the A's would take some dead money back. The main reason he'd be an upgrade is his ability against RHP. The Reds really don't have many good alternatives at very many positions that can get on base against RHP. In 2012, in in 336 PAs against RHP, Crisp went .259/.337/.436/.774. in 2011, in 386 PA, it was .293/.335/.414/.749. The Reds don't have any CF candidates that can do that. I'd imagine those numbers would improve in GABP as opposed to Oakland. Throw in his defense and he'd be a nice upgrade.

He's not my top choice, but he's better than anything on the roster.

[757690]

Funny thing is, his career splits suggest exactly the opposite.

B-Ref's career splits show that only 221 of his career plate appearances have come against pitchers considered "power" pitchers (with a .657 OPS). Against finesse pitchers, he's had an .856 OPS among 334 PAs.

That's roughly one quarter of his career plate appearances against power pitchers. Know what's interesting? The NL total splits this year profiles just shy of one quarter of all plate appearances being against "power" pitchers.

So that means not only is the perception of Heisey's struggles not backed up by stats, but his proportion of who he's been facing is right in line with the rest of the league -- meaning he's not benefiting from being utilized any special way according to his strengths.

Maybe I had it backwards, or maybe it has nothing to do with power pitchers vs. finesse pitchers, but the Reds had a book on Heisey and said at the beginning of the season that they would play him mostly against pitchers he does well against, and they did.

The fact remains that Heisey has never been a starter in the majors, so you really can't assume his stats would translate the same if he were to start. And that's not even getting into his defense.

[Brutus]

Maybe I had it backwards, or maybe it has nothing to do with power pitchers vs. finesse pitchers, but the Reds had a book on Heisey and said at the beginning of the season that they would play him mostly against pitchers he does well against, and they did.

The fact remains that Heisey has never been a starter in the majors, so you really can't assume his stats would translate the same if he were to start. And that's not even getting into his defense.

No they really didn't. It was about 25% against power pitchers, about 30% against finesse pitchers and 45% against everyone in between. Again, that is actually almost exactly the same splits as the entire league, meaning he wasn't treated much differently than most other hitters. I find it amusing that you can't even be sure what type of pitcher he struggles against, yet you're making the claim "said at the beginning of the season that they would play him mostly against pitchers he does well against, and they did." How can you know they played him against the pitchers he did the best against when you don't even recall what type of pitcher it is he does best against? Yes, he does best, statistically, against finesse pitchers. But so does the rest of the league and the rest of the league has more finesses pitchers than starters. So if he started everyday, he'd be facing more finesse pitchers anyhow.

As far as never being a starter, I think you have it backwards. You can't assume his production than it's already been after three years of teams having advanced scouting reports on him; getting nearly 1,000 plate appearances and being used in a multitude of roles. There is absolutely no evidence at this point that we'd see a side of Chris Heisey we haven't already seen or a lesser talent level than has already been exposed. The only way that narrative works is if it were shown that Heisey were facing a certain type of pitcher an inordinate amount. But again as I have already shown, his proportion of facing power vs. finesse pitchers is almost identical to the rest of the league. So he's absolutely not being used in a way that differs from his talents or the rest of the league as a whole.

This just seems like a situation where the stats don't jive with what people want to believe about a guy, so they have to rely on an untested, unsubstantiated and unproven narrative to make a case that isn't otherwise supported by the evidence.

If you don't like Chris Heisey on the basis of what he is... fine. That's understandable. But after nearly a grand in trips to the plate, it's time to stop throwing out the fictional narrative that teams will figure him out with more playing time. These teams have dozens of pages of reports on him already. They know everything there is to know on him. He's a known commodity by now. His weaknesses have been exposed and he is who he is.

It's not really a matter of what he'll do, largely, it's simply a matter of whether that's good enough. Relative to some other players that might be on the market, it's probably not. Relative to Drew Stubbs in 2012... it should have been. Relative to Coco Crisp? It's pretty much one in the same statistically but unlike Crisp, Heisey doesn't cost $7 million.

[Kc61]

I would like to see Stubbs and Heisey both elsewhere next season. Both talented guys, but their on base and contact skills are quite poor.

Heisey strikes out 23.8% of the time. He walks 5.8% of the time. Lifetime stats. Lifetime .315 OBP. 909 PAs.

On another team, Heisey's power and hustle might fit well. The Reds need more contact, more OBP, and can live without whatever power is supplied by Heisey and Stubbs.

Crisp is a contact hitter with a .329 OBP. He's a better fit than the current CFers, but not ideal and he makes a lot of money. Frankly, I doubt the Reds will sign him, kind of expensive. I think the Reds will go for someone cheaper like Eric Young as a starter and aggressively promote Billy Hamilton.

When the Reds drafted the kid Winker this year, one of their scouting guys said that the organization can use more contact hitters. Boy, was he right.

[757690]

No they really didn't. It was about 25% against power pitchers, about 30% against finesse pitchers and 45% against everyone in between. Again, that is actually almost exactly the same splits as the entire league, meaning he wasn't treated much differently than most other hitters. I find it amusing that you can't even be sure what type of pitcher he struggles against, yet you're making the claim "said at the beginning of the season that they would play him mostly against pitchers he does well against, and they did." How can you know they played him against the pitchers he did the best against when you don't even recall what type of pitcher it is he does best against? Yes, he does best, statistically, against finesse pitchers. But so does the rest of the league and the rest of the league has more finesses pitchers than starters. So if he started everyday, he'd be facing more finesse pitchers anyhow.

As far as never being a starter, I think you have it backwards. You can't assume his production than it's already been after three years of teams having advanced scouting reports on him; getting nearly 1,000 plate appearances and being used in a multitude of roles. There is absolutely no evidence at this point that we'd see a side of Chris Heisey we haven't already seen or a lesser talent level than has already been exposed. The only way that narrative works is if it were shown that Heisey were facing a certain type of pitcher an inordinate amount. But again as I have already shown, his proportion of facing power vs. finesse pitchers is almost identical to the rest of the league. So he's absolutely not being used in a way that differs from his talents or the rest of the league as a whole.

This just seems like a situation where the stats don't jive with what people want to believe about a guy, so they have to rely on an untested, unsubstantiated and unproven narrative to make a case that isn't otherwise supported by the evidence.

If you don't like Chris Heisey on the basis of what he is... fine. That's understandable. But after nearly a grand in trips to the plate, it's time to stop throwing out the fictional narrative that teams will figure him out with more playing time. These teams have dozens of pages of reports on him already. They know everything there is to know on him. He's a known commodity by now. His weaknesses have been exposed and he is who he is.

It's not really a matter of what he'll do, largely, it's simply a matter of whether that's good enough. Relative to some other players that might be on the market, it's probably not. Relative to Drew Stubbs in 2012... it should have been. Relative to Coco Crisp? It's pretty much one in the same statistically but unlike Crisp, Heisey doesn't cost $7 million.

It has little to do with wither or not teams have figured him out. It has much more to do with against whom Heisey has played and what he has figured out.

The Reds said they were going to play him against pitchers he does well against. I take them for their word. The pitchers he does well against might not be based at all on whether they are power, or finesse pitchers, it might be pitchers who don't throw a slider, who have a great cut fastball, or who are from states that entered the union before the Civil War.

I simply don't trust the stats of any player who has t played a full season as a started, no matter how many AB's they have, to tell me what they can do as a starter.

[corkedbat]

It has little to do with wither or not teams have figured him out. It has much more to do with against whom Heisey has played and what he has figured out.

The Reds said they were going to play him against pitchers he does well against. I take them for their word. The pitchers he does well against might not be based at all on whether they are power, or finesse pitchers, it might be pitchers who don't throw a slider, who have a great cut fastball, or who are from states that entered the union before the Civil War.

I simply don't trust the stats of any player who has t played a full season as a started, no matter how many AB's they have, to tell me what they can do as a starter.

Crisp wouldn't be my first choice (second or third either), but I'd take him if I could get him cheap and pair him with someone else. Not a Heisey fan. OK as a fourth OF I guess, but never been as high on him as some here seem to have been. I was really disappointed that they didn't sell high on him last offseason. I believe the missed a real opportunity. I believe he's easily replaceable.

[marcshoe]

Beane says Crisp is sticking around. He would be a good fit, though. Go after Parra.


Was that a haiku?

[Phhhl]

Beane says Crisp is sticking around. He would be a good fit, though. Go after Parra.


Was that a haiku?

Haiku ingenious or not, Parra would be an excellent stopgap centerfielder for this ballclub while we wait for Hamilton to develop. How about Leake for Parra and plug Cingrani/Chapman or Corcino into the number five starter spot? Arizona's fascination with Micah Owings suggests they fall for pitchers that hit. Re-sign Ludwick and Broxton and go to war?

[Krusty]

I don't believe Parra was a leadoff hitter for the Diamondbacks. For 7 million for one season, the Reds could afford Crisp. They would options if Hamilton isn't ready to go in 2014 by picking up Crisp's 2014 option.

Make this a three-way deal where you send Stubbs elsewhere. Essentially you replace Stubbs with Crisp. You get your leadoff hitter while keeping your major league roster pretty much intact.

[Benihana]

Wouldn't DeJesus be a better alternative to Crisp?

Can't see any reason why the Cubs would need a $5M CF next year on a 1 year deal.

If Garza is healthy, I wonder if Leake (and Stubbs?) for Garza and DeJesus would work? Both are in the last year of their deals, and the Cubs need to build assets for 2014 and beyond.

Reds could then make Garza a qualifying offer after next year to regain a draft pick, an replace him in the rotation with Corcino or Cingrani for 2014.

[PuffyPig]

Wouldn't DeJesus be a better alternative to Crisp?

Can't see any reason why the Cubs would need a $5M CF next year on a 1 year deal.

Deesus hsn't been a regular CF since 2007.

He'll be 33 when the seaon starts, and is a poor bet to play CF full time at any kind of acceptable level.

[mth123]

Wouldn't DeJesus be a better alternative to Crisp?

Can't see any reason why the Cubs would need a $5M CF next year on a 1 year deal.

If Garza is healthy, I wonder if Leake (and Stubbs?) for Garza and DeJesus would work? Both are in the last year of their deals, and the Cubs need to build assets for 2014 and beyond.

Reds could then make Garza a qualifying offer after next year to regain a draft pick, an replace him in the rotation with Corcino or Cingrani for 2014.

The Cubs are looking for core players. Garza is the Cubs last real chance to cash in for some high value talent. I can't see them agreeing to a deal for guys who are in a downward spiral where value is concerned. I could see them being interested in Leake, but he wouldn't be a main component of a deal. He'd be more like how Volquez was involved in the deal for Latos. He'd be part of it to fill the spot, but the main return would be the long term players who come with him. I'd be prepared to part with at least one of Cingrani or Corcino and some other prospects as well, maybe H-Rod or Vidal would interest them. I'd pass on Garza and just try to pick up Dejesus on the cheap.

I agree that I like Dejesus better than Crisp. Assuming major deals for guys like Ellsbury and Fowler are out of the question, my CF hit list, in order, would be Parra, Pagan, Dejesus, Crisp and Span. It shouldn't require major latent to get any of those (Pagan as a possible free agent, but that looks less likely given his post season).

[LegallyMinded]

Forget about Coco Crisp-- the Chris Young deal makes Jonny Gomes available!

All kidding aside, Gomes actually had a good year in Oakland: 2.1 WAR in only a half season of at bats. Now, I don't want to see the Reds go after him, by any stretch of the imagination, but he can be a pretty useful player, at least when a team takes advantage of his platoon splits, as Oakland did.

[Tadasimha]

Why not make a run at Angel Pagan - he's a free agent, will only be 31 at the start of next season, better OBP than Crisp and is a switch hiitter who leads off. He'll be more expensive than Crisp but give him a 3 year deal and after 2013 bring up Hamilton as the LFer and than move Billy to CF after Pagan is gone.