A Quick Poll: Francoeur versus Dukes
by Dan Lewis on Mar 17, 2010 8:17 PM EDT
Email
PrintThe rules:
- Assume both are under team control for 3 years (2010-2012) and have the same salary for 2010. I realize that isn't the case, but I want to remove that factor from your analysis.
- Whomever you choose would be our starting RF, and would not be removed except for injury or trade. That is, even if your choice has a putrid April through August, Jerry would let him fight his way out of it.
- Your choice can't play CF or LF. If Bay or <strike>Beltran</strike> Pagan go down, it's Lil' Sarge time!
- The player you don't choose is released -- so there's no roster crunch.
- Assume neither player's behavior causes a significant suspension. You can factor in off-field antics, grission, leadership, being a bad clubhouse influence, marketability, etc., but whomever you choose is (absent injury) getting 140++ games.
This FanPost was contributed by a member of the community and was not subject to any vetting or approval process. It does not necessarily reflect the opinions, reasoning skills, or attention to grammar and usage rules held by the editors of this site.
63 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I wouldn't assume each plays 140 games
Since durability is one of the biggest things Francoeur has over Dukes.
kind of a weird question
you’re asking us to disregard, salary, positional flexibility, giving them the same number of games, behavioral/attitude issues…i mean, at this point we’re not really talking about jeff francouer and elijah dukes are we?
"I only wanted a few things out of life -- a wife, children, to play baseball and to hunt deer." - Turk Wendell
Sure you are
I corrected the injury issue, and you can still consider behavioral issues, but it can’t affect the # of games played.
Salary is, at this point, the same anyway. Francouer is a sunk cost.
Position flexibility is irrelevant because if Dukes comes in to play RF (at the expense of Francoeur’s spot on the team), the only situation he’d be in CF is if Beltran and Pagan were both hurt and GMJr were no longer on the team.
I cant vote
maybe its the accountant in me, but Frenchy has slightly more than 4 years of service, Dukes has slightly more than 3-ish. Frenchy has a 5 mil base salary to work with and Dukes has considerable less. Jeff has a history of counting stats that arbitrators like, (HRs, Rib-Eyes amd such.) The salaries are just so much different that I cant ignore them when making a hypothetical decision like this. Ergo, vis-a-vis, I vote Shinjo.
by Sokojoe on Mar 18, 2010 12:17 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
This
I’m just assuming that for Frenchy, the salary is $5 mil, and for Dukes, its $5 mil (for cutting Frenchy) + League min (for adding Dukes).
The thing is, on the open market, considering Dukes is making so little from the Nats anyway, couldn’t he demand a pretty decent salary? I mean, he could ask for $1-2 mil and still provide lots of surplus value, assuming its on a team that is approaching replacement level at whatever spot he’s filling in. Frenchy is bad, but not replacement level bad. If its as assumed, that Dukes would only cost league min, its a no brainer, but for $1-2 million, its much more debatable.
Considering all that, I’m with you, Shinjo it is.
"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet
What a fool I was to defy him"
-HST
by Mark Himmelstein on Mar 18, 2010 3:55 PM EDT up reply actions
I don't see Dukes commanding much more than the league minimum,
He was just released by the worst team in baseball. Between Dukes ’ reputation as a headcase and the leg injuries the last few years, a lot of teams are going to be scared away.
Without Dukes attitude issues, I think it's a no-brainer.
For me the potential upgrade in Dukes is somewhat erased by the distractions he’s likely to cause, and I’d rather answer “other” there and give Martinez a go at it.
Pinella: Where th f*ck was that pitch at?
Ump: Lou, don't you know that you're not supposed to end a sentence with a preposition?
Pinella: Where the f*ck was that pitch at, a$$h*le?
by Stephen Schmidt on Mar 17, 2010 9:01 PM EDT reply actions
Urgh
I voted Francouer and now I feel dirty. I’d happily ship Jeff out for a pitcher and let El Martillo come up, but I just don’t see Dukes having any kind of consistent career.
I'm in for Dukes
Honestly I fear that the anti-anti-Francoeur backlash has now progressed to the point where “well, he’s not the worst player available” seems to some people like an argument for keeping the Frenchman around. Francoeur should be tradable at some point during the pre-season or early in the season, and Dukes is both free and better at baseball. If he doesn’t work out for whatever on- or off-field reason, he can easily be cut with no regrets.
by anonymous on Mar 17, 2010 10:05 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
Of course...
The Fangraphs database doesn’t take into account Women Assaulted Above Replacement
by psiogen on Mar 18, 2010 11:36 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Ambiorix Burgos once led the league in Manslaughter Above Replacement
John Olerud, Hall of Famer. Got a nice ring to it.
I see what you are trying to get at
Yea, I get it: Dukes (in the books) will provide for more wins than Frenchy. Now, in the same amount of time, Frenchy amassed 535 more plate appearances. I know we aren’t supposed to account for injury or suspension troubles… but they are actually very relevant.
Francouer amassed 535 more plate appearances
but “more” did not equate to “better.”
I don’t want either one of them on the team.
"He's definitely mixing it into his repertoire. That's French for 'repertoire' " - Keith Hernandez
by Catsmeat Potter-Pirbright on Mar 18, 2010 3:44 PM EDT up reply actions
That's *minus* 1.1 WAR
That means that if Frenchy had gotten injured, it would have helped his teams.
Stealing from Eric a few months ago
X = 1
Y = -1
X * 300 = 300
Y * 600 = -600
More suck = bad
by James Kannengieser on Mar 19, 2010 9:27 AM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
Simple logic
I like it.
"For $11.4 million you can actually get a good player. But of course this is one of the things foolish organizations do: They complain that they can't afford good players after spending millions of dollars on not-good players." --Rob Neyer
by boom_roasted on Mar 19, 2010 7:09 PM EDT up reply actions
I'm going Frenchy
but the decision was far from easy
by KeithsMoustache on Mar 18, 2010 11:38 AM EDT reply actions
Frenchy until F! comes up to seize his rightful place in RF
Dukes in RF means F! in AAA, no deal.
"Wait till Biggus Dickus hears about this!"
by scott from peekskill on Mar 26, 2010 11:24 AM EDT up reply actions
Francoueur should, and will, be the Mets RF
Dukes has problems. Frenchy has problems. Dukes problems limits his appearances in games. Frenchy’s problems show up in his numbers. I’m tired of all these Anti-Francoeur people spitting out numbers. Duke’s problems will spread to the rest of the organization, while the only downside to Frenchy’s problems are his own stats (and maybe the overall Mets K’s). Guess what, if Frenchy IS really as bad as all the Anti-Francoeur claim, we have F-Mart ready to go. Problem solved?
"I’m tired of all these Anti-Francoeur people spitting out numbers."
You may be at the wrong website.
"He's definitely mixing it into his repertoire. That's French for 'repertoire' " - Keith Hernandez
by Catsmeat Potter-Pirbright on Mar 18, 2010 3:46 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
What are numbers but results in the game?
Numbers that, in turn, have an effect on each particular game, and on the season.
"Blinding ignorance does mislead us. O! Wretched mortals, open your eyes!"
Gil Hodges IS a Hall of Famer.
by Brooklyn Dodgers Mets Fan on Mar 18, 2010 4:18 PM EDT up reply actions
That was only true for one out of his three seasons.
The other two he was below replacement level, or a very bad player (and probably deserving to be cut based on both attitude and performance).
Pinella: Where th f*ck was that pitch at?
Ump: Lou, don't you know that you're not supposed to end a sentence with a preposition?
Pinella: Where the f*ck was that pitch at, a$$h*le?
by Stephen Schmidt on Mar 18, 2010 4:47 PM EDT up reply actions
It's only a projection
To this point he’s been below replacement level more seasons than he’s been above replacement level, so I think those projections are optomistic at best.
Who cares how bad the Bay deal will look in 2013, the world is going to end in 2012 anyway
by Stephen Schmidt on Mar 18, 2010 5:30 PM EDT up reply actions
He's also only 25
and hasn’t really had many above minor league seasons so I’d think you’d have to take his below replacement level seasons with a grain of salt since prospects don’t usually light the world on fire their first year or two in the majors.
"We have a plan, and our plan, I like our plan'
it's Omar's world, we're just livin in it.
Jeff Francoeur has averaged 1.34 WAR per 600 PA's between ages 21-25, and I don't really want him either.
Who cares how bad the Bay deal will look in 2013, the world is going to end in 2012 anyway
by Stephen Schmidt on Mar 18, 2010 6:11 PM EDT up reply actions
The problem is that Francoeur's value
Was virtually all tied into defense and power, both of which apparently dropped off pretty severely. Dukes has a much more well rounded skillset that seems less likely to be exploited by opposing pitchers the way Frenchy’s crappy plate discipline has. Of course, I still think Francoeur’s due some positive regression from his awful year and a half in Atlanta, but his upside is still seriously limited, while Dukes’ isn’t so much. The problem with Dukes is that its entirely plausible that he gives you 50 games of .320-.330 wOBA and then needs to be replaced for the rest of the season because of his lack of durability, but the Mets do have quite a few corner outfield types who are already better than replacement level.
"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet
What a fool I was to defy him"
-HST
by Mark Himmelstein on Mar 18, 2010 6:20 PM EDT up reply actions
I'm really just against either of them.
I’d rather see Pagan or Martinez given a shot as the everyday RF’er when Beltran gets back then either Francoeur or Dukes. Of the two, at least Francoeur is far less likely to become a distraction, and I’d hope neither of them would be part of the 2011 Mets team.
Who cares how bad the Bay deal will look in 2013, the world is going to end in 2012 anyway
by Stephen Schmidt on Mar 18, 2010 6:26 PM EDT up reply actions
In that sense, I'd figre you'd want Dukes over Frenchy
Since Frenchy’s as safe a bet as anyone on the team for 150+ games, and the organization is so infatuated with him that unless his performance is awful, assuming he’s healthy, he’ll get those 150+. If Dukes replaced him, even if the organization treated him the same way, its much more likely you either hit his upside of a .350-.390 wOBA or he gets hurt and you wind up with Pagan or Martinez for a good portion of the year anyway.
"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet
What a fool I was to defy him"
-HST
by Mark Himmelstein on Mar 18, 2010 6:43 PM EDT up reply actions
I'm actually leaning a bit the other way on it.
I feel like Jerry has to win now or be fired, and if Frenchy doesn’t have a good BABIP he likely will have very little value. I think that even if Frenchy doesn’t end up on the bench this year, his expected salary makes him a safer bet to be released in the offseason than a semi-productive Dukes. Dukes at a cheap rate would be an interesting guy, but as a bench player his attitude and personality scare me to the point that I’d rather see a guy like Evans or Carter get the 5th outfield spot on the roster in 2011.
Who cares how bad the Bay deal will look in 2013, the world is going to end in 2012 anyway
by Stephen Schmidt on Mar 18, 2010 6:58 PM EDT up reply actions
I just don't see why you wouldn't want a projected above average OF for very cheap.
Over the course of the season there are injuries, and players need rest. Beltran is injured, and I think Dukes would be significantly better the Fernando this season. If the team can’t compete this year, Dukes provides big upside in the future as well. Under the assumption that Francoeur starts and is entrenched in RF, Dukes doesn’t fit on the team. But if Frenchy can be benched and platoon, Dukes can start while Beltran is out and be the 3rd or 4th OF (or 5th) when he comes back. If it doesn’t work out, Dukes can be cut, and Fernando or Pagan can have a shot starting.
His projections have him at almost exactly league average (I definitely would call him above average by any stretch), and as I said before I think he'll fall far short of them.
I think he’s far more likely to be in the 1 WAR range when all is said and done, and between Francoeur, Pagan, Martinez, and possibly Carter I feel like we have plenty of guys on the roster already who could produce at about that same level. If he was generaly a good guy, I’d be all for the move (although I doubt he’d have been released). He’s really not though, and given that we have several similar options on the roster I’d take the generally good guys over the a-hole.
Who cares how bad the Bay deal will look in 2013, the world is going to end in 2012 anyway
by Stephen Schmidt on Mar 18, 2010 7:22 PM EDT up reply actions
*wouldn't*
Who cares how bad the Bay deal will look in 2013, the world is going to end in 2012 anyway
by Stephen Schmidt on Mar 18, 2010 7:23 PM EDT up reply actions
Why do you think he'll fall short of them?
He’s been considered a top tier prospect for years, and before his injury in 08 was well on his way to being a 3-4 WAR player.
"We have a plan, and our plan, I like our plan'
it's Omar's world, we're just livin in it.
To me 2008 looks like a fluke.
He was a top prospect in the minors when he was a 6’1 200lb center fielder that had plus speed and the potential to develop plus power, but much of his value was tied to his athleticism letting him play a very good outfield defense. He’s listed at 250 now, and I’d guess that he’s far less capable of covering ground like he used to and he’s definitely not as fast nymore (as evidenced by hi 3 steals last year to being caught 10 times).
He’ll still walk a good amount, and he may have enough bat to hit 20 HR’s if he stays healthy, but I really think he’ll be well below average in the field now and even if healthy he’s not exactly a plus on the basepaths anymore. The guy just got big, and many of the potential positives when he was a prospect just don’t apply anymore.
Who cares how bad the Bay deal will look in 2013, the world is going to end in 2012 anyway
by Stephen Schmidt on Mar 18, 2010 7:38 PM EDT up reply actions
When your argument against him
predicates on 220 PA as a rookie and 416 PA appearances hurt/clearly off his approach, ignoring the 334 PA in the middles doesn’t help your credibility. I think you’re putting too much stock into WAR as a predictive stat, especially in these tiny sample sizes.
I'm not trying to throw out his 334 PA's,
I’m trying not to ignore the 636 which include his most recent season. It’s really too small a sample size to make a very accurate assumption about his defense (the total body of work), but 2/3 of his data (including his most recent) says he’s not a very good defender. Visual observations and his balooning weight support that idea as well.
It’s also worth noting that his CHONE batting projections are even better than his Bill James numbers (and we all know that James tends to be on the glass half full side). Between both his offensive and defensive projections, I really just don’t buy CHONE’s numbers here. I think he’ll be a slightly below average player who has major baggage attached, and therefore would rather pass.
Who cares how bad the Bay deal will look in 2013, the world is going to end in 2012 anyway
by Stephen Schmidt on Mar 19, 2010 10:49 AM EDT up reply actions
I agree
He could bounce back and is still young and has some power and walks, which i love, but I think he is slipping.
I hate that this is between Dukes and Frenchy though. I don’t like either on the team.
I'm 100% with you there.
I prefer Pagan and Martinez to either of them, and I’m really a fan of Bay-Pagan-Martinez as the opening day outfield at this point.
Who cares how bad the Bay deal will look in 2013, the world is going to end in 2012 anyway
by Stephen Schmidt on Mar 19, 2010 1:06 PM EDT up reply actions
Dukes/Burrell
That’s a funny comparison, but his Marcel projection is kind of similar. Not as bad a fielder in the corners, but Dukes was pretty bad in the field last year.
Just the high k rate, high walks, low average, decent power. Actually, I like a Mike Cameron with a terrible glove comparison for Dukes as well.
Kinda jokey, but just trying to say I think Dukes is not quite so good to warrant overlooking everything else.
When you use UZR you have to use multiple years of data,
not just the last year. According to UZR he has been an above average RF. He could have lost some range, but I really have no idea if that is true or not. He is most likely not a terrible fielder at all. The Steve Sommers projections, which include the fan scouting reports, have him at +0.89 UZR/150.
The average wOBA of Bill James, CHONE, Marcel, and ZiPS is .34675. CHONE is .354. The difference between the average of all of them and CHONE is about 3 runs over 453 PA. That’s not much at all.
I understand that you have to use multiple years of data when looking at UZR.
I’m also looking at the fact that he’s put on almost 50 pounds since being drafted and nearly 30 since breaking into the big leagues. He’s also coming off of knee surgery, as well as hamstring and calf issues last year, which given the added weight is plenty of reason to expect him to perform below the roughly average level he was at in the past.
Who cares how bad the Bay deal will look in 2013, the world is going to end in 2012 anyway
by Stephen Schmidt on Mar 19, 2010 2:06 PM EDT up reply actions
That's fair.
I’ve heard he’s in great shape, but 250 pounds on his 6-1 frame might be too much to be a good fielder.
My UZR comment was to wobatus.
I thought he said Dukes is a terrible fielder, but now that I re-read it I don’t think he is exactly saying that.
Yup
He is bad in center, but sure, you need more UZR data. he seemed ok in the corners. Weight gain won’t help. Visually, which I know is misleading, he can look pretty bad on his routes, but I’m no scout.
Federalbaseball has some more up about it: Duquette saying players off the record suggesting he wasn’t a good clubhouse guy. FWIW.
http://www.federalbaseball.com/2010/3/23/1386249/washington-nationals-power-alleys
He is projected to be slightly above average.
5 runs above according to CHONE (453 PA) and 7 according to the Fans (509 PA). The other projections systems are a little less optimistic about his offense, so I would say he is projected to be slightly above average. And what Gina said.
I'm not disagreeing
I’m making a case of Dukes in the either/or scenario, though I think health and contract issues are two of the biggest ones. If Dukes is going to earn a fat paycheck on the open market (for a player just released anyway) its a debatable issue. If he’s singable for league min, its not, he should absolutely be added.
"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet
What a fool I was to defy him"
-HST
by Mark Himmelstein on Mar 18, 2010 7:37 PM EDT up reply actions
Dukes has a gun, so I think he would win
Oh, that’s not the kind of “versus” we’re talking about. Never mind.
by JoshNY on Mar 18, 2010 4:52 PM EDT reply actions 2 recs
this was prob the "most difficult" vote I have ever cast on a website
I went with Frenchy. Even though I think that Dukes has more ability.
The mets from a clubhouse perspective have been a mess. I am not calling it Grisson or anything here, but I dont think that adding a guy as volitile as Dukes will be good for the ballclub. We are not talking about a “LMillz” type distraction here,… Dukes seems to be a real jerk. Mega Jerk one might say.
It sometimes feels like the weather changing 1 degree is all the distraction this team needs to fall off its hinges, I dont think Dukes will be good for the team.
Dukes is worse than Sheffield?
From what i read Sheffield kept his head down and was OK in the clubhouse. But then again, the Mets showed no hustle or grission in the 2nd half of the season last year. Did that have anything to do with the fact that Sheffield was here or just a lack of heart in the players we have?
Dukes = no thanks
"Wait till Biggus Dickus hears about this!"
by scott from peekskill on Mar 26, 2010 11:27 AM EDT up reply actions
What are the chances he takes a minor league deal?
We could have Evans, Fernando and Dukes in the outfield, cut Jacobs and put Carter on the major league bench. Problem solved.
except the mets would do something crazy like dfaing evans or carter
"We have a plan, and our plan, I like our plan'
it's Omar's world, we're just livin in it.
Evans AND Carter.
"Blinding ignorance does mislead us. O! Wretched mortals, open your eyes!"
Gil Hodges IS a Hall of Famer.
by Brooklyn Dodgers Mets Fan on Mar 19, 2010 11:10 PM EDT up reply actions
Dukes is more likely to get injured. Therefore, I pick him.
John Olerud, Hall of Famer. Got a nice ring to it.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recommended FanShots
Recent FanShots
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Baseball Nation Recent Stories
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Ku Klux Klan, umpires and bowling: Why the minor leagues tossed out Jim Evans academy
- The Cardinals Hall of Fame can now be found at Bill Clinton’s library in Arkansas (Huh?)
- Will Bryce Harper start the season with the Nationals?
- Mitch Mustain puts football behind him, signs reported rookie deal with White Sox
- Robinson Cano and Denzel Washington face off in Jay Leno’s Yankees trivia contest
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
