Mike at RAB has a nice read out regarding the power of the Yankee offense. To open the article, he puts forth an offensive comparison between Mark Teixeira and Nick Swisher, one that is totally valid and very interesting. In fact, from a statistical standpoint, you’d be surprised at how close the two are, offensively.
However, Mike then offers the following comment regarding defense.
Now, by no means am I saying Swish is as good as Tex. Tex provides far more defensive value than Swish ever will, but offensively, the two have provided nearly identical output over the last 80 games.
Now, does Teixeira truly provide more defensive value than Swisher does? I actually think that Swisher is a more valuable commodity in terms of his fielding capabilities. When you think about it, an average first baseman—that’s what Tex is, according to defensive metrics—isn’t as valuable as an above average right fielder, which Swisher has been this season.
There is some complexity here, though. Teixeira does offer some intangible attributes, particularly in terms of his defensive reputation. Because he is known as a good defender, he actually helps the infield feel comfortable when making plays to first. That makes the infield a better defensive unit. However, Swisher can also play left field and first base (he’s not particularly good at either position, but he’s not bad by any means). That positional flexibility makes Swisher, I think, a lot more valuable as a defender.
It’s definitely an interesting argument. Compared to Swisher, Teixeira is a better offensive weapon (although, as Mike notes, it’s closer than you would think), however, in terms of defensive value, I think you have to give that to Swisher. What do you think?
If you enjoyed this article, please consider sharing it!
8 Responses to Teixeira versus Swisher
Leave a Reply
TIQ IQ
I think that the creators of UZR openly admit their formula doesn’t work for first basemen, and that Teixeira really does provide very good, tangible, defensive value.
That isn’t entirely true. They admit that it does not quantify everything the first baseman does, and that because range is only one part of his job, it cannot be used alone. That being said, it does tell you about his range, which even my eyes tell me is not spectacular. His throwing and scooping, on the other hand, are as good as I have seen from a first baseman.
It is an interesting question, Chris. A good fielding RF does have more defensive value, plus Swisher plays multiple positions, so he has the versatility element as well.
If this is even a debate then I have gone crazy!!! How can anyone try and say Tex is less valuable in anyway than Swish? He has great defense and I don’t care about his range it rarely comes up, everything else he does is way more important because he isn’t afraid to throw the ball and he has saved at least 8 errors for Jeter this year on erratic throws. Swish plays an average first base, an average corner outfield spots and has little arm at all, not to mention all the bone head plays he makes on D that Tex doesn’t. I have yet to see Tex make a clear cut mental mistake that otherwise would have been avoided, Swisher on the other hand I have seen make many and recover a few he didn’t mess up on. If you want Swish I will take Tex we will see who’s team wins (it would be mine).
So somehow a .240 hitter who hits 28 HRs is better than a .300 hitter who hits 40 HRs? I must not know the difference in numbers anymore, and you can’t say Swisher walks all that much more because Tex walks a lot as well. The two players are no where near each other in talent level or Value… Offensively, defensively, spitting on a bug Tex is always more valuable… If you don’t think so… I cry for you…
Chris, this is an absurd comment. The subject of offensive value was touched on only because Mike did in his article (I was intro’ing that before discussing defense, which was my main focus). Never did I actually say that Swisher is a better offensive player when compared to Teixeira (nor did I ever say they were equal). And, with regard to your comments abou Tex and how he is better than Swisher in almost every way, I do have to say that such blind loyalty is, in fact, crazy, especially when evidence disproves that notion (defense-wise).
Let me get this right, ignoring the first half of the season and their entire careers, Swisher and Teixeira are about equal offensively, so let’s write an article and based almost entirely on range about how Swisher is also better defensively (also ignoring that Teixiera’s UZR/150 is below his career average this season).
It is ludicrous to put Swisher in the same spectrum with Tex, Mark actually has a chance to be the best switch hitter playing Nick Swisher walks and hits 28 HRs a year… One equals the other how?
First off, to Rob, no, I never said they were equal offensively. I pointed to an article which demonstrates how equal they have been recently (and that’s not even the point of this post, as I focus on defense). Never have I said that Teixeira and Swisher are equals offensively. Maybe I should have emphasized “this year.”
And, so what if Teixeira’s career UZR/150 is higher than what we’ve seen this year? In every year since 2004, Mark Teixeira has been an average to below average fielder (that’s according to UZR and UZR/150). He has only had one exceptional season at first base since then (I’ll go with the more recent data, rather than the skewed career numbers). Also, to boil UZR down as a mere range statistic is a bit misleading (it also incorporates error data and double play data for infielders).
Now, to Chris, you have not provided one valid argument against what I said in this post. All you’ve commented on is Swisher’s offense, which I even say in my post is not as good as Teixeira’s. You’re complaining about how Swisher hits 28 homers and hits .240 (and I never said Tex and Swisher were offensive equals, nor did Mike), but you have not addressed the defensive side of things (which is the topic at hand). In the one instance where you did try to critique Swisher’s defense, you said things that were totally false. For instance, Swisher doesn’t have “little to no arm,” in fact, I thought it was common knowledge that he has a pretty good arm yet tries to show it off too much (accuracy was his problem earlier in the season—that and overthrowing, not having no arm).
All you’ve said is, “Well, that’s not true! Tex is great!” But where is the evidence that demonstrates that Teixeira is a great fielder (he’s a good scooper, don’t get me wrong, but he’s challenged on a few levels)? All metrics I’ve seen have said otherwise. If he were a better fielder, it still wouldn’t be a difficult argument to win. Swisher’s defensive flexibility helps his case—we know that he plays two other positions and is adequate at them. So, in a defensive showdown, sure, I’ll take Swisher and watch him play three positions while Teixeira is stuck at first base. Why it’s hard for you to admit that, from a defensive standpoint, an above average right fielder, who can play two other positions, is more valuable than an average first baseman is beyond me.