As reported by a Washington Nationals beat writer (via MLBTR):
[Nyjer Morgan} is the not the only outfielder the Nationals are looking at. They have interest in Braves outfielder Jordan Schafer. He began the season as Atlanta's everyday center fielder, but was sent down after the team acquired Nate McLouth from the Pirates.
The Nationals have been unhappy with their outfielders for quite some time. They have come to the conclusion that Adam Dunn and Josh Willingham belong in the American League as designated hitters and Elijah Dukes makes too many mental mistakes.
Only Willie Harris and Austin Kearns have played solid defense, but they are not part of the team's long-term plans.
The presence of Nate McLouth does make Jordan Schafer expendable if trading him nets us a more established offensive player. Man, they're already looking to trade Adam Dunn... Jim Bowden really messed that team up. Dunn is only signed for two years, and is relatively affordable, but I can't fathom us trading for Dunn when we could have signed him without giving up anything just four months ago.
Josh Willingham has always intrigued me, and I would consider him a definite offensive upgrade over Jeff Francoeur or Garret Anderson -- Willingham has the best OPS on the Nationals at .919. I'm not convinced that I would trade a prospect on the magnatude of Jordan Schafer for Willingham, but maybe he's worth it.
The article also says that they are interested in acquiring a second baseman after the season, could they have interest in Kelly Johnson?
0 recs | 89 comments
Food for thought
You cannot get much worse defense in LF than Garrett Anderson. That is not based on statistics, that is based on direct observation. If I could understand fielding metrics, I would attempt to provide them.
However, I understand offense:
FUGA in ’09: 84 OPS+
FYF in ’09: 66 OPS+ (I wish that were a type-o)
Big Donkey in ’09: 137 OPS+
Willingham in ’09: 140 OPS+ (in 140 ABs)
You can look up other numbers if you wish…I’m not saying we need to make the trade or not, but having either of those guys would inject some production into the lineup.
jug - June 28, 2009
Well...
Like I’ve tried to point out, Anderson is hitting fine now and getting better. Francouer and Kelly are the real drains on our offense at this point…
ejruiz - June 28, 2009
Oh, I agree. I was only comparing those 4 players, since that was what was in the OP.
jug - June 28, 2009
I've been able to watch only a few games on tv this year
but from what I’ve seen, Anderson takes the worst routes and simply does not have the speed to make up for it. Either that or his speed is so bad it looks like his routes are, too.
SunDolphin - June 28, 2009
i say do it..IF
the braves can make up a few more games on the phils the next few days..jordan may pan out, then again he may just be a realllly quick defensive player that strikes out ALOT in the majors..he has promise..kj may get better..but kj is expendable we have an option or two…it just depends on how close we are the next few days..at first i was dunn all the way..but it may not necessarilly be the lack a hitter like dunn..it may be coaching..i don’t know..seems like some days when our hitters should sit back and take a bunch of pitches..we are overly aggressive on first and 2nd pitches..and quick up and down innings.
SidKotchman - June 28, 2009
a 1-5 of
McLouth, Yunel, Chipper, Dunn, and BMac would be formidable to say the least.
was385 - June 28, 2009
We don’t have the money to take on Dunn. Not only that but his defense is terrible and he strikesout a ton.
jack dein - June 28, 2009
I would be soooo pissed at Wren if he trades Schafer for Dunn and didn’t sign Dunn in the offseason. I think if we REALLY tried we could have signed Dunn for under $8 million that he got from the Nats this season and had him all year. I have been and will still remain on Wren side but that would be his biggest bonehead trade that he has ever done to sit there and give up Schafer for Dunn when we could have had Dunn in the offseason without given up nothin for him just cash.
rockybull - June 28, 2009
THAT is if we even have the cash to get this deal done now.
rockybull - June 28, 2009
This.
+1
ejruiz - June 28, 2009
Really?
We could have signed him with an inferior offer? Why?
MichaelProcton - June 28, 2009
I think we could have had him for slightly less than what the Nationals offered. Dunn has played on bad teams throughout his career and the chance to win might have been a draw to him.
jack dein - June 28, 2009
exactly
jack dein. Thats why i think we could have signed him for 1 or 2 million less. And plus it seemed like at the World Baseball when Chipper and Dunn were on the same team i saw them around each other quite a bit seemed like they were pretty good friends. He took an offer of $8 million this year from Nats and $12 million next year so somethin like 6 million and 13 or 14 million in 2010 would seem legit to me. So thats what i was talkin about MichaelProcton. The thing is im not even sure we even have the cash to take on Dunn salary now anyway these are just rumors.
rockybull - June 28, 2009
You do know...
this is a guy who sat on that offer for three months hoping somebody would pay him more, right?
MichaelProcton - June 28, 2009
From what i heard we never even made an offer to him. Rumored was that Wren didn’t like his defense so he never even contacted him. If we had made an offer and had the cash i think he would have signed with us for $6 million or so for the 09 season. I mean i dont know for a fact but he has never made the playoffs and im sure he was aware that the Nats are just NOT gonna make the playoffs in 2009 or 2010.
rockybull - June 28, 2009
and he has a MUCH better chance at maken the playoffs with us than the Nats thats for sure.
rockybull - June 28, 2009
I would do it
but I’m not really sure what the Nationals would have to offer. I’m became very unimpressed with Schafer and now I’m not that sure that he will ever pan out. I would take Kearns or Willingham but they would have to throw someone else to complete it.
jack dein - June 28, 2009
ok this is for the big time defensive stat guys. I dont know alot about the defensive stat thing i will be honest but doesn’t it show that McLouth is more suited in LF cause his defense in CF isn’t all that great? And Schafer is a natural in CF? Ummmm and plus we traded Gorkys, im thinkin that we need to keep Schafer cause we dont have any other defensive wiz CF out there.
rockybull - June 28, 2009
Last year McLouth had the highest fielding percentage of any CF at .997
jack dein - June 28, 2009
ok its just i remember some defensive stat guys mentioning how bad his defense is his URZ or somethin like that i mean im not familiar with that kind of stat but the way they talked he is more suited for LF than CF in the future or whatever.
rockybull - June 28, 2009
I remember hearing last year when he won the Gold Glove that everyone was surprised, but then a few days ago i saw he fielding percentage and it was pretty good.
jack dein - June 28, 2009
There are more things to defense than fielding percentage.
If his range isn’t that good and he only tries to make “sure thing” plays, there are certainly better options out there.
MichaelProcton - June 28, 2009
Fielding percentage is virtually useless as a statistic. It ignores too many aspects of defense.
McLouth’s career UZR in CF is -25.6 (also negative in RF), and -10.8 UZR/150. This year he is -3.5 UZR and -5.2 UZR/150.
Schafer OTOH is -2.3 UZR and -8.2 UZR/150 (in just his major league time).
UZR/150 is a normalized stat assuming 150 games. Both refer to runs above average. Its just one stat, and in Schafer’s case the sample size is small, but McLouth is a below average CF.
All stats from baseball cube.
B_Agate - June 28, 2009
I think his offense makes up for any problems on defense. Would you rather have Schafer out there getting to more balls but striking out a lot or McLouth not getting to as many but providing good offense and some speed to our offense.
jack dein - June 28, 2009
Personally i would for next season rather have Schafer in CF and McLouth in LF but thats just me.
rockybull - June 28, 2009
It's not mutually exclusive...
The question is more about who would be better in CF if they’re both on the team, not who should be on the team.
MichaelProcton - June 28, 2009
He also had the lowest Dewan number at any position last year, if I remember correctly
bigjoe - June 28, 2009
This is why I don’t understand fielding metrics. This sounds like calculus.
But I do at least agree the FP is pretty useless.
jug - June 28, 2009
UZR divides the field into a bunch of zones. Each zone is the responsibility of a fielder. Every ball is plotted into the zone and whether the fielder made the play on it or not is recorded. For each zone, an average number of balls fielded is recorded and then each player’s results are compared to that average. For example, if McLouth fields 7 balls in zone 101, while the average center fielder fields 8 balls, McLouth would be charged with one play below average. The run value of a ball is determined by finding out what a single, double, etc. has been worth throughout baseball history, and for each play missed, the fielder is charged with that many runs and for each play made above-average, the fielder is credited with that many runs. There are park adjustments and other modifications, but that’s basically it.
A great fielder will be +15, very good is +10, above-average is +5, so on and so forth.
One thing to keep in mind is that defensive stats take a long time to stabilize because of how much is missing from the equation, so that a really good fielder could have three seasons where they are +10, 0, +10. You can just find the average or weighted average of those years to determine their true talent fielding level.
There’s lots of noise in the data and it’s not perfect by any stretch of the imagination, but until better stuff comes out of Hit f/x and other tools like that, UZR is the best by far that we have.
17843 - June 28, 2009
great explaination
eaheckman10 - June 29, 2009
What about UZR+
what are the differences and which is better?
justincredubil02 - June 29, 2009
Uh, you mean UZR/150?
bigjoe - June 29, 2009
that's the one
thanks.
justincredubil02 - June 29, 2009
Thats spread out over 150 games to simulate what his number would be over a full season, as opposed to regular old UZR, which is just up to that point in time
bigjoe - June 29, 2009
What about positioning?
Does UZR take into account a fielders position before the batter makes contact? I understand that each fielder is responsible for a particular zone, but I also understand that just about all fielders are placed in spots due to scouting, batter tendencies, etc, and is almost never in “straight up” center field for example.
I guess this may be too much to ask for in a defensive metric and this may be one of the reasons why it isn’t completely accurate.
In a Flash - June 29, 2009
Or shifts?
Like the Big Papi shift…what if he decides for whatever reason to go opposite instead of pulling and he hits it to where the 3B normally would be, but since the 3B is now in the SS position, he cannot get to the ball…
justincredubil02 - June 30, 2009
So is UZR a career average or seasonal? When you say “up to that point” it confuses me a little.
Would it be accurate to say that UZR is the season up to that point (whether it be 10 or 100 games) and UZR150 is the last 150 games, whether they be all this current season, or back into last season?
justincredubil02 - June 30, 2009
UZR is seasonal...
the 150 is just adjusted to a (mostly) full season’s worth of games for normalization.
MichaelProcton - June 30, 2009
http://diamondbacks.mlb.com/media/video.jsp?mid=200806273015164&c_id=ari
royhobbs - June 30, 2009
Trade them all
Trade FUGA, FYF, and KJ for a port-o-john, 2 bottles of pepto and a janitor. We would get the best side of this deal. Throw in Schafer for a bat boy and you got yourself a block buster.
Dammit JIm - June 28, 2009
have all of you lost your minds? Josh Willingham? Is winning this season worth that much to you guys? Your going to give up a future stud like JS for the CHANCE to make up ground on the Phils? ANd for Willingham? wow, 14 straight winning seasons has really pampered some fans. Look at how much the farm has been depleted from moves all season, and you are considering moving our #1 or 2 farmhand. Im shocked and appalled gondee, you would back this up. Granted, the team isnt very good this season, but we have a future to think about, and JS will be able to contribute to that more than willingham. Not only that, FYF is STILL going to be in RF, wheres JW going to play? Hes a 4th OF on the Nationals for Pujols sake.
If anyone is being moved, its Escobar, mark my words, his days are numbered
bravesguy311 - June 28, 2009
Escobar?
Does this mean I get to watch Diory Hernandez start every day?
TradeAndruw - June 29, 2009
You'd imagine...
They would get an SS back if they traded him.
MichaelProcton - June 29, 2009
No way we trade Schafer.
Scott Coleman - June 28, 2009
I agree.
cbwilk - June 29, 2009
I dont think we can take on Dunns salary although I think some trade could develop in the off-season
Heyward is the next crime dog - June 28, 2009
Salary
Might be able to take on one year of his salary if the Nats ate the rest of this year.
niekromurphy - June 28, 2009
possibly
Heyward is the next crime dog - June 28, 2009
I don’t think Wren will trade Schafer after he shipped off Gorkys…right? Schafer’s a guy we need to hold on to. It will be a mistake if we let him go, even for Adam Dunn.
soup du jour - June 28, 2009
Don’t give up on Schafer. The kid has SO much potential. He has the ability to come back strong and help us win now and for the next 6 years.
homerun - June 28, 2009
I would like to see Jordan get his strikouts under control so we can put him back in CF and move nate to a corner.
Heyward is the next crime dog - June 28, 2009
The future is Schafer more than Dunn. I think they will regret it if they trade him because IMO it won’t be too long before he could come up and be a real contributor to the team for a very long time.
NCChopper - June 28, 2009
keep JS in the ATL
im no expert, far from it…but he looks like .280/15HR guy with a lot of speeeeeed….perfect for the top of the lineup…..with time…
lemke2blauser2bream - June 28, 2009
This is horseshit
In what scenario is trading Jordan Schafer for ANY outfielder on the Washington Nationals a good idea? Why is this not being shot down universally in here?
Willingham – What kind of significant, team-improving upgrade is he over anyone on the current roster?
Dunn – The money seems to be an issue here, not to mention, the fact that the Nats don’t want him should speak volumes for the Braves’ potential interest in him. Especially when he was on the market almost all winter. If we didn’t want him then, trading Schafer to get him now is beyond absurd.
Kearns – Not even sure where to start on how shitty this guy has become.
I’d be surprised if this rumor went further than it has already. It’d be giving up on Schafer way too soon. Kelly Johnson, though, they can have.
hoboken_wood - June 28, 2009
Yes.
get swoll yunel - June 28, 2009
word
bravesguy311 - June 28, 2009
I’d probably trade him for PUT UP YA DUKES
bigjoe - June 28, 2009
+1
MichaelProcton - June 28, 2009
Will someone please...
give Freddie Freeman a glove to play left field.
mikie baseball - June 28, 2009
I thought Heyward already had that on lock
MichaelProcton - June 28, 2009
Would seem to me ...
he could move to right with all that athletic ability.The point should be obvious
mikie baseball - June 28, 2009
Sorry, it wasn't to me.
Were you suggesting that we have a lesser need at 1B?
MichaelProcton - June 28, 2009
Heyward plays right, Schafer plays center, McLouth plays left, Freeman plays first. That is how it will be
acie4mvp - June 29, 2009
Thats the plan acie, BUT alot can change in a few years, either because of injury, underperformin or trades. But yeah i get what your sayin that is the plan at the moment.
rockybull - June 29, 2009
This is not going to happen.
17843 - June 28, 2009
Again, I agree.
cbwilk - June 29, 2009
Logan has a lot of speed, a great arm and plays terrific center. He was absolutely rushed to the majors and got hurt once he got there. We HAVE to give him some time to get healthy and productive again. It would be ridiculous to not see what he’s capable of once properly prepared.
Bravely going forward - June 28, 2009
This
is exactly what I feared. We don’t need to trade away the future for the sake of one season. Schafer needs more time to develop, but he can be a killer center fielder and, with Heyward and McLouth in the corners, our outfield will be pretty fearsome. Dunn/Willingham is a short-term band-aid that wouldn’t really help us for more than a year or two.
sexbobomb - June 28, 2009
This
rockybull - June 28, 2009
No Kearns, he has never done anything,
Willingham maybe, but not for Schafer, maybe KJ
Adam Dunn, is still a pipe dream however he is more of a 1st basemen then an OF.
Regardless we need the offense so getting Dunn would be nice and I guess I would give up Frenchy or KJ but not Schafer.
Holty_Panthers_Fan - June 28, 2009
He’s more of a DH than anything that has to do with a glove.
Little Lady - June 29, 2009
Imagine this outfield in 2012. Jordan CF Heyward RF Nate LF
Heyward is the next crime dog - June 28, 2009
trades
Why not ship KJ and Kotchman and get a right handed batter back . I hope we could deal them to Florida for Ross , Cantu or Uggla . Yes i know Uggla is struggling but he can play 2nd and has power .
~~banditwolf~~ - June 29, 2009
Hmm...
Because there isn’t an ML-ready 1B in the system. I know you might say Canizares, but I really don’t think he has the hitting to make up for his weak glove. Something like Kotchman’s defense is not the kind of thing you’d notice until it was gone.
MichaelProcton - June 29, 2009
umm
Trade Schafer for the nationals trash? Great idea
acie4mvp - June 29, 2009
"Nationals may have trade interest in the Braves' center fielder Jordan Schafer"
In other news, I’d like to date Megan Fox. Hoo-ah.
Yakker - June 29, 2009
i dont concur
she’s to skinny
drumzalicious - June 29, 2009
blasphemy
bravesguy311 - June 29, 2009
nah doc
i like my women with some meat on em especially in the lower regions
drumzalicious - June 29, 2009
Then buy her a steak and tape it to her ankle
Yakker - June 30, 2009
I don't know if that's my reason, exactly...
But I’m definitely not into her either.
MichaelProcton - June 29, 2009
I feel like statements like these are only acceptable if they’re made with the understanding that, if she were to approach you in real life, there is no scenario where you wouldn’t gladly accept her advances. To say that, as a dream woman, she’s not your preference is perfectly fine, but if anyone’s going to argue that that woman isn’t completely desireable, well, that’s insane.
cbwilk - June 30, 2009
Yeah...
But I wouldn’t say that puts her in a particularly exclusive club among Hollywood actresses.
MichaelProcton - June 30, 2009
I don’t disagree with that at all.
cbwilk - June 30, 2009
True
but her having a huge crush on Olivia Wilde kind of does…
Yeah, chew on that for a while…
justincredubil02 - June 30, 2009
LOL
so true…in fact, there are probably only a handful of celebrity-type people who I would not giggle with glee over in a real-life situation.
They may not be the “fantasy filler” to some, but when you are comparing Ferraris to Aston Martins, who gives a damn? lol
justincredubil02 - June 30, 2009
Yeah
I find that’s a real problem with the women I date. Too skinny.
Yakker - June 30, 2009
as crazy as it sounds...it is possible:
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2008/06/24/article-1028963-01B8E60600000578-499_468x852.jpg
http://www.nairaland.com/attachments/95826_too_damn_skinny_jpgc830f2a543ffc9b7a36c6b3a7a2dce4b
justincredubil02 - June 30, 2009
Yeah, good point. That’s some pretty sick shit there. Although I’d still probably nail at least 2 of those girls. Add in a fifth of JD and that number probably goes up.
Yakker - June 30, 2009
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Talking Chop to post a comment.