Reds acquire Jim Edmonds
Today the Reds traded Chris Dickerson to the Brewers in return for Jim Edmonds. (update: Here's a link to the initial thread on this, which is bursting at the seams from comments. :) )
Edmonds, of course, has a long history of excellence with Walt Jocketty. He has a good argument for the Hall of Fame. And I have a terrific memory of watching a game in St. Louis in 2001 with my dad, when Edmonds made one of his patented diving catches in the outfield.
The problem is that he's old. Does he have anything left? And is he a meaningful improvement over Chris Dickerson, who is similar in player type: a left-handed CF?
Jim Edmonds, LHB CF
Hitting
| Year | Age | Team | PA | %K | %BB | %LD | BABIP | AVG | OBP | SLG | ISO | wOBA | RAA | RAR |
| 2007 | 37.0 | STL | 411 | 18% | 10% | 20% | 0.285 | 0.252 | 0.324 | 0.403 | 0.151 | 0.313 | -8 | 6 |
| 2008 | 38.0 | SDP/CHC | 401 | 20% | 14% | 18% | 0.249 | 0.235 | 0.342 | 0.479 | 0.244 | 0.347 | 5 | 18 |
| 2010 | 40.0 | MIL | 240 | 22% | 9% | 29% | 0.344 | 0.286 | 0.350 | 0.493 | 0.207 | 0.365 | 8 | 15 |
| 2010 | 40.0 | CHONE | 338 | 21% | 11% | --- | 0.287 | 0.247 | 0.331 | 0.423 | 0.177 | 0.334 | 2 | 12 |
| 2010 | 40.0 | ZiPS | 87 | 22% | 11% | --- | 0.291 | 0.247 | 0.333 | 0.429 | 0.182 | 0.339 | 1 | 4 |
| 2010 | 40.0 | Oliver | 126 | 21% | 10% | --- | 0.280 | 0.232 | 0.302 | 0.357 | 0.125 | 0.295 | -4 | 0 |
Notes: The last three lines (in italics) are projections. wOBA, RAA, and RAR are park adjusted numbers. They may differ from FanGraphs/b-ref because of the park adjustments, or the specifics of how I'm calculating them. RAR does not include information about fielding or position.
Edmonds skipped 2009 due to oldness. He had a tough season in 2007, but was surprisingly strong (vs. my memory) in 2008 for the Padres and Cubs. This year, he was a surprise name during spring training, and won a time share in the outfield--mostly in CF. And he's hit well out there, though his BABIP and LD% have been a bit high.
The projections shown above are up to date projections based on the last several years of data including this year's performance. Not surprisingly, they forecast a decline for Edmonds over the rest of the season. While Oliver (at Hardball times) is pretty pessimistic on him, both ZiPS and CHONE forecast him as an average to slightly above-average hitter. He's unlikely to hit for much of an average, but he'll walk at a good clip and hit for decent power. You can do worse from a 4th outfielder / platoon hitter, which is probably(?) how the Reds see him now.
Over a full season, expecting that he can't play every day, Edmonds looks to be something in the range of a .330-.340 wOBA hitter, which equates to +1 to +1.5 WAR (ignoring fielding for now). He's already been worth ~+1.5 WAR (15 runs divided by 10 runs per win) to the Brew Crew thanks to his strong performance thus far, but I think he's been playing above his true talent level so far this season.
Fielding
Edmonds over his career has been a plus center fielder, with +3 runs/season rating by UZR (going back to 2004) and +9 runs/season by Total Zone. But I don't think you can expect that from him anymore--he's 40 years old and has been having issues with his legs this season!
Still, the Brewers have played him primarily in CF this season, and UZR is pretty bullish on him: +5 runs in 360 innings (beware very small sample size). Baseball Info Solutions' DRS has a similar rating: +3 runs in CF. ... Honestly, I just don't believe those numbers. Total Zone projects him as a -1 fielder per season, but in a corner outfield spot--that's the equivalent of a -10 run CF. Oliver projects him as -0.4 over the remainder of the season, I think at CF. ...
All this is to say that I really don't know how to judge him in CF. Let's just call him an average defensive CF. I can't decide if that's generous or conservative.
Overall Value
So we have a +1-1.5 WAR hitter, an average fielder (+0 WAR), playing defense-oriented position (+0.25 WAR/season in ~50% playing time, so +0.125). Overall, I'm rating him as a +1.1-1.6 WAR player per full season. If he could play every day, he's be more valuable, but I don't think he can and stay healthy or productive. Still, this is better than I expected to find when I started down this road.
Edmonds is signed for 850k this season base salary, plus bonuses for playing time. He has 240 PA's. If we assume he'll get ~350 PA's overall this season, he gets another $805k in performance bonuses, making his salary $1.6 M.
Since WAR are worth something like $4M right now, he's worth around $5.4 M per season. That means he's a $3.8 M asset, which pro-rated over the rest of the season is somewhere around $1.3 M.
What they paid: Chris Dickerson, LHB CF
Hitting
| Year | Age | Team | PA | %K | %BB | %LD | BABIP | AVG | OBP | SLG | ISO | wOBA | RAA | RAR |
| 2008 | 26.2 | CIN | 122 | 29% | 14% | 19% | 0.410 | 0.304 | 0.410 | 0.608 | 0.304 | 0.425 | 10 | 14 |
| 2009 | 27.2 | CIN | 299 | 22% | 13% | 22% | 0.360 | 0.275 | 0.368 | 0.373 | 0.098 | 0.333 | 0 | 10 |
| 2010 | 28.2 | CIN | 45 | 42% | 2% | 22% | 0.360 | 0.205 | 0.222 | 0.273 | 0.068 | 0.225 | -4 | -3 |
| 2010 | 28.2 | CHONE | 391 | 29% | 11% | --- | 0.350 | 0.254 | 0.340 | 0.410 | 0.156 | 0.331 | 1 | 13 |
| 2010 | 28.2 | ZiPS | 97 | 29% | 10% | --- | 0.333 | 0.244 | 0.330 | 0.384 | 0.140 | 0.317 | -1 | 2 |
| 2010 | 28.2 | Oliver | 403 | 28% | 11% | --- | 0.348 | 0.250 | 0.337 | 0.385 | 0.135 | 0.324 | -1 | 11 |
Chris Dickerson had a fabulous cup of coffee in 2008, but since then, when he's managed to be healthy, his primary hitting asset has been his ability to get on base via the walk (career BB% = 12%). He has a bit of power, but he's only hit two home runs since his 2008 debut.
Overall, his career MLB numbers, and his projections, have him somewhere between average and a tad below average as a hitter: say 0.320-0.330 wOBA? He's already 28 years old, and he's had a lot of trouble staying healthy, and managers will tend to sit him against lefties... so you can't forecast much more playing time than you do with Edmonds. 400 PA's (57%) seems fair, and is where CHONE and Oliver have him.
Overall, I think a reasonable offensive projection for Dickerson is right about where Edmonds is: 1.2 or so WAR per season. You lose a bit in terms of rate of production, but you gain a bit in terms of playing time.
Fielding
Dickerson has a reputation as a good fielder. We don't have terrific sample sizes to work with, but his career UZR in CF is +9 in 250 innings. DRS has him at +7, and TZL has him at +6 runs. That's terrific on a per-inning basis. He doesn't rate as well as a plus-plus CF should in the corners, however: +1.5 UZR, +7 DRS, +2 TZL in ~590 innings. I remember him having some trouble reading the ball in LF last season, so perhaps that's what we're seeing? I don't see that as a long-term problem. Total Zone projects him as a +12 fielder in a corner outfield slot (equals ~+2 in CF), while Oliver has him as a +8 fielder (though I'm not sure at what position). Prior to the season, I had him as a +2 fielder in 28% playing time, or ~+7 runs in a corner.
Overall, given his solid reputation, his generally plus fielding numbers everywhere he plays, I'd guess he's somewhere between an average and a +5 run center fielder per season. Since we're only projecting 57% playing time, I'm going to peg him as a +0.1 WAR fielder in CF.
Total Value and Comparison to Edmonds
So, overall, I'm ballparking Dickerson as a +1.2 WAR hitter and a +0.1 WAR fielder, and he gets a pro-rated +0.14 bonus for playing CF. Altogether, that makes him a +1.4 WAR property, worth ~$5.6 M if you had to replace him as a free agent. Dickerson only makes 415k, so he's a $5 M asset, which, pro-rated to the remaining games, is ~$1.7 M.
You also do get Dickerson for several more years of control. B-Ref says the earliest he would be arbitration eligible is 2012, so if we assume 0.5 WAR/yr aging (I'll just use 0.25 WAR for 2011, since we're most of the way there already), and make some assumptions about how salaries will inflate and how arbitration will go for him, that puts him on this sort of timeline:
2010: 0.5 WAR (remaining), Worth $1.9 M, paid ~$200K, $1.7 M asset
2011: 1.15 WAR, worth $4.8 M, paid 400k, $4.4 M asset
2012: 0.65 WAR, worth $2.7 M, paid $1.1 M, $1.3 M asset
2013: 0.15 WAR, worth $0.7 M, paid $1.1 M, 0.4 liability
So overall, Dickerson properties should be an asset worth something around $7 M over the coming 3 years or so.
I had Edmonds as a $3.8 M asset. So, at least looking at it this way, the Brewers "won" this trade: they secured a guy who is probably worth a bit less than half of what they sent. Neither of these players is particularly valuable, so we're sort of splitting hairs here, but the Brewers did fine here.
...but all that said, I'm starting to like the deal for the Reds...at least a little bit. Reasons:
- The Reds are in the hunt for the first time in years and are on the bubble. I don't think you throw long-term considerations out the window, but I think you can upweight current-season contributions.
- The margin of error here is probably a at least +/-1 WAR. Playing time alone is a huge variable. It's just really hard to know what to expect from these guys. Can I see Edmonds or Dickerson as +2.5 WAR players over the next 162 games? Sure. Can I see them as replacement level? Yeah.
- You can leverage Edmonds' offense via platooning, pinch hits, and defensive substitutions, and he probably gives you more bang for the buck in those situations than Dickerson. Dickerson, as a more fielding-oriented player, is less leverage-able...or, at least, there's an argument for that.
- One of Edmonds' problems is that he probably can't play every day. This is fairly easy to solve by platooning him, and the Reds have good right-handed CF options to insert into the lineup when needed. Dickerson's playing time issue is that he historically has gotten hurt a lot. You can't platoon someone who isn't available to play.
- Say what you will about how overhyped clubhouse presence, veteran leadership, playoff experience, etc, are...but it probably doesn't hurt to have another guy like that on the roster.
So, I guess where I'm at is that while initially I didn't like the deal much, I think this probably does slightly improve the current Reds. Not by a lot. But probably by a little bit. And every bit helps. Go Reds!
17 comments
|
2 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I like this trade
I’m going to jump right out and say it that I like this trade. Of course, that comes with an asterisk. I’m looking at the next three months, not the next three years. If I look at next year and beyond, then getting rid of Dickerson for a player that probably won’t be here in a few months doesn’t make much sense. However, I think Edmonds will be a huge help to the team in the final two months of the season and in the post season. Edmonds may be aging, but he is a proven asset. Dickerson had a great year in 2008, but as you stated, his numbers weren’t great last year, and I don’t know how well he’ll jump back after his injury.
Besides, Edmonds is one of those players who has a solid work ethic and does a good job day in and day out. He may not be superstar material, but for most of his career, he is one of those players that you wish you had a team of him playing.
Edmonds *was* a superstar
In his prime, Edmonds was a legitimate Hall of Famer. The question in my mind is one of longevity. Apparently I won’t have to decide that for another six years, though. ;) -j
I write at:
Beyond the Boxscore | Red Reporter | Basement-Dwellers.com | Twitter: @jinazreds
by JinAZ on Aug 9, 2010 6:39 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
This site is just bursting at the seams with original content today!
Let me write out a formal proof for you.
And irrational anger!
Eighty-five percent of the f*ckin' world is working. The other fifteen percent come out here. A f*ckin' playground for the cocks*ckers.
-Lee Elia on Cubs fans
by Farneyismycopilot on Aug 9, 2010 5:09 PM EDT up reply actions
Present.
"People don't kill people. Burning oreo packages kill people."
by crolfer on Aug 9, 2010 5:12 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Me too!
Eighty-five percent of the f*ckin' world is working. The other fifteen percent come out here. A f*ckin' playground for the cocks*ckers.
-Lee Elia on Cubs fans
by Farneyismycopilot on Aug 9, 2010 5:13 PM EDT up reply actions
Third!
"And then there was the USAID guy in Kandahar who drove a giant pink Cadillac, which the locals set on fire one day. If you wanted to destroy something symbolic during a riot, you just could not do better than that. Good stuff." - Ghosts of Alexander
Yeah fuck this deal. FUCK IT!
And I HATE Chris Dickerson. Several years ago I asked myself if I could tolerate Jim Edmonds and Tony LaRussa as Reds, even if it meant them winning the WS. After quite a bit of thought, my answer was no. Not at all.
I don’t know what I am going to do when Edmonds comes to the plate tonight. tHom and Chris and Brantley will be jerking themselves off about “consumate winner” this and “knows how to win” that. I’ll likely be cleaning my own vomit off my living room walls.
I had a good laugh when the Cubs did this a few years ago. Now the joke’s on us.
by Brian B on Aug 9, 2010 6:49 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
I know, I don't know what's come over us
I had another post that I had to postpone until tomorrow because of all this activity. That will be two posts by me in a month! Unthinkable!!?
-j
I write at:
Beyond the Boxscore | Red Reporter | Basement-Dwellers.com | Twitter: @jinazreds
by JinAZ on Aug 9, 2010 6:41 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
not sure what to make of it
Hopefully Edmonds will give the Reds something they weren’t getting. I really don’t think he is an upgrade on defense from anyone we’ve played out there and I hope he can have some positive veteran presence at the plate. I really like CDick as a player but he does get hurt easily.
Rob Dibble, Norm Charlton, and Randy Myers were nasty boys. Arthur Rhodes is a nasty MAN. by Brendanukkah
I like this deal
If only because it improves our bench down the stretch. Dickerson was not going to be a significant bat off the bench, as JinAZ mentions, so the Reds got something they didn’t have. Plus, there’s already plenty of defense on the big club that Dickerson wasn’t needed for his strengths. An outfield of Heisey, Stubbs, and Bruce is pretty special defensively.
There’s enough young talent on the squadron that Dickerson will not be missed in the coming years, so no real loss there, either. Go Reds in ’10!
"Edmonds skipped 2009 due to oldness."
That’s awesome.
by Daedalus on Aug 9, 2010 5:51 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
It's my first good one-liner!
Only took 5 years of blogging to find it. See you in another 5…
I write at:
Beyond the Boxscore | Red Reporter | Basement-Dwellers.com | Twitter: @jinazreds
by JinAZ on Aug 9, 2010 6:44 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
I just have to keep reminding myself to just root for the uniform.
You are as dumb as anything you hate.
Wonderful post
Yeah, those guys and the Cincinnati Reds. They're a terrible football team. / Because they're a baseball team? / Exactly. You know who's the worst football team? The Philadelphia Flyers. - Best Show
by RijoSaboCaseyWKRP on Aug 10, 2010 2:46 PM EDT reply actions






























