Non-Tender Candidate: Jeremy Reed

by James Kannengieser on Oct 15, 2009 2:00 PM EDT in Analysis Comment 21 comments

Note: If a team decides to not offer a contract to an unsigned player on the 40 man roster, the player is non-tendered and becomes a free agent. Per Tim Dierkes at MLBTradeRumors, some former non-tendered players include David Ortiz, Joel Pineiro, Jayson Werth and Takashi Saito.

Jeremy Reed initially looked like an unspectacular yet promising pick-up in the J.J. Putz trade. He was once a top prospect, tearing up the minor leagues and the majors in a brief 2004 call-up. Some put him on the level of Kevin Youkilis at one point. With average defense and unrealized potential at the plate, the 27 year-old Reed projected as a decent 4th/5th outfielder. Instead, his season turned into an under-the-radar disaster.

Reed's .263 wOBA was awful, especially for a (mostly) corner outfielder. His BABIP of .312 was slightly higher than his career figure, so he probably wasn't unlucky. The 22.4% K-rate, .062 ISO and 0 home runs reinforce that Reed's offensive output was on par with the likes of Yuniesky Betancourt in 2009. A non-terrible performance as a pinch hitter (.278 BA) was not enough to compensate.

Defensively, it appears he was slightly above average. This is the lone positive (save an unfortunate appearance at 1st base against the Dodgers), as his UZR of +1.7 jibes with a Plus/Minus figure of +4. Sean Smith projected Reed as a +6 corner OF this season so I feel comfortable saying he was above average in the field.

An 0/3 stolen base performance and -3.21 EqBRR (non SB/CS baserunning) show that Reed was terrible on the basepaths this year. Worst on the Mets, according to the EqBRR stat. With a sub-50% career stolen base rate, it's a safe assumption that running the bases is not his forte. Factoring Plus/Minus and UZR to measure defense, as well as baserunning, here is Reed's adjusted Fangraphs WAR for 2009:

Bat	Field	Repl	Pos	BR	RAR	WAR
-9.4	2.9	5.9	-4.8	-3.2	-8.6	-.9

At -0.9 WAR, he was among the least valuable players in Major League Baseball. And that's in just 178 plate appearances, while making slightly under $1M. Even if a reserve outfielder isn't a strong all-around player, he can have use with a specialized skill. Endy Chavez's defense or Eric Hinske's power are such examples. Reed doesn't seem to have anything of the sort to offer the Mets, as harsh as it might sound.

Verdict: Non-tender and it's a no-brainer. The Mets just can't wait around for busted prospect Reed to magically put it all together. The fact that he is from San Dimas, CA isn't reason enough to retain his services.

0 recs | Comment 21 comments | Share

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

San Dimas High School football rules!!

by The 'Ropolitans on Oct 15, 2009 2:03 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I prefer Knibb High football, myself.

To each his own, I suppose.

by Mr. Bananagrabber on Oct 15, 2009 2:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

My wife interviewed at the school they used to film the San Dimas High School scenes

It’s in Scottsdale Arizona, which is like Southern California, except not at all.

by HotChipWillBreakYourLegs on Oct 15, 2009 3:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Be excellent to each other

and party on dudes!

You don't cheer for the Mets. You drink for the Mets.

by Kevin H on Oct 15, 2009 4:46 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Manuel Fails Again. big surprise.

I agree that there is no reason to keep Reed around. I have a feeling his year was more of a disappointment due to his use. I mean, it’s gotta be hard to sharp when you get so little playing time. What’d he have, 4AB in April? He didn’t even get starts when people were getting hurt.

Just another guy that maybe a couple of starts in a row, some regularly playing time, some real evaulation, couldn’t have hurt. I’d rather have seen Reed than Sullivan in September, theoretically he has more upside/potential. I guess anyway. If Sullivan was that important he would’ve made the team in Spring. This feels like a classic case of Manuel disagreeing with the roster choice of Minaya/Jeff and ignoring a guy he doesn’t like.

Still no reason to keep him around though. I really think the Mets should look to have some power off the bench. Pagan has a little, and he’s find as the 4OF, but they’d be better off with a Hinske type who could at least provide that threat off the bench at the end of the lineup.

-Ceetar, the Optimistic Mets Fan

by Ceetar on Oct 15, 2009 2:07 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

non-tender candidate

means they’ll give him a 2 year deal

by Gina on Oct 15, 2009 3:28 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I'd be fine with a minor league deal for Reed

or possible league min

"Solo homers usually come with no one on base." -Ralph Kiner

by metsguy234 on Oct 15, 2009 4:22 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

as long as we don't rely on him to be something he's not

i’m fine having him around in a limited role

"Solo homers usually come with no one on base." -Ralph Kiner

by metsguy234 on Oct 15, 2009 8:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

GTFO, Reed

"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw

by squid92 on Oct 15, 2009 8:13 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Ok, after reading some of the comments, I feel it necessary to give a math lesson.

Just because someone is in a limited role does not give them positive value!!! If someone is a very bad hitter, above average fielder in a non-fielding position, that person is devoid of value. Reed racked up 0.7 WAR in LESS THAN A FOURTH OF A YEAR’S WORTH OF AT BATS. That is outstanding. “So what if we limit his role, give him less at bats?” you ask. Gee, because even if you gave him 20 at bats, you’re losing a run or two that you could get back for literally the league minimum from any other player in the league. It’s Wins Over Replacement Level for a reason if your talent level falls below replacement level, you should be replaced.
If you fall below this threshold, you do not deserve a roster spot on a 25 man roster. Especially when you have a HIGH BABIP, meaning you may actual regress(!) offensively.
If you punch yourself in the balls once, it doesn’t make it ok because you didn’t do it 85 times. Why don’t you just NOT punch yourself in the balls?

"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw

by squid92 on Oct 15, 2009 8:23 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Strike thing messed it up. Should read:

Just because someone is in a limited role does not give them positive value!!! If someone is a very bad hitter, above average fielder in a non-fielding position, that person is devoid of value. Reed racked up 0.7 WAR in LESS THAN A FOURTH OF A YEAR’S WORTH OF AT BATS. That is outstanding. "So what if we limit his role, give him less at bats?" you ask. Gee, because even if you gave him 20 at bats, you’re losing a run or two that you could get back for literally the league minimum from any other player in the league. It’s Wins Over Replacement Level for a reason…if your talent level falls below replacement level, you should be replaced.
If you fall below this threshold, you do not deserve a roster spot on a 25 man roster. Especially when you have a HIGH BABIP, meaning you may actual regress(!) offensively.
If you punch yourself in the balls once, it doesn’t make it ok because you didn’t do it 85 times. Why don’t you just NOT punch yourself in the balls?

"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw

by squid92 on Oct 15, 2009 8:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

he doesn't have positive value

but we could do worse

"Solo homers usually come with no one on base." -Ralph Kiner

by metsguy234 on Oct 15, 2009 8:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

what

by James Kannengieser on Oct 15, 2009 8:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

irrefutable

by Sam Page on Oct 15, 2009 11:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

sure we could do worse. Like if we decided to make the ballboy the 5th outfielder

but we could a lot better for the major league minimum. That is why it is WINS OVER REPLACEMENT. If you are worse than Replacement, you suck, majorly, and there are a lot of minor league lifers better than you.

"We're investigating the investigative procedure of the investigation of Tony Bernazard"---Omar Minaya (he really didn't say it but he would"

by firejerrynow on Oct 16, 2009 6:59 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

wait? seriously?

That’s a great way to run a team. The, “eh, we could do worse” method.

by HotChipWillBreakYourLegs on Oct 16, 2009 10:01 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

you didn't pass math, did you?

"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw

by squid92 on Oct 16, 2009 1:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

You guys like him soooo much more than I do.....

I can’t stand Manuel and think he’s an idiot, but his mistake regarding Reed to me was letting him get 178 plate appearances despite his showing no offensive value. Maybe Gammons is right and the seeming love affair of trotting out Reed and Green time after time to fail yet again and again was in a hopeful effort that if given enough chances maybe they’d do something useful and justify the Seatle trade. Reed didn’t do nearly as well as Sullivan, and that’s setting a pretty low bar, and Reed cost over twice as much to deprive a real player of a postion on the team. Non-tendering is the kindest and most human way to remove this blight upon the offense.

by Cranky50 on Oct 15, 2009 8:33 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs