Mike Jaggers-Radolf’s excellent post on Brett Gardner, and several of the comments it generated, got me thinking about how he was a player that virtually everyone who follows the minor league missed on (see Mike Axisa’s mea culpa here). In particular, I wanted to address several points raised in the comment section of the Gardner post, which formed the inspiration for this post. Tom Swift got my brain going by asking:
We should consider how it was that Gardner was not more highly thought of as he came up in the minors. My recollection is that the hype was much more about AJax than about Gardner. Is there something wrong with how we evaluate prospects? By we, I mean fandom, not the Yankees.
That question got me thinking about how everybody missed on Brett Gardner. Now, we didn’t miss on everything. We knew he had at least 70 speed (on the 20-80 scouting scale), was a good contact hitter, had decent plate discipline, and could play a good centerfield. We knew he had very little power, as evidenced by his whopping total of 4 home runs in his minor league career. But still, it was somewhat miraculous that a guy who walked onto the baseball team at the College of Charleston (not exactly a baseball powerhouse), was considered an overdraft as a 3rd-round pick out of college by the Yankees, and put together a solid but not amazing minor league career (but never being close to cracking the BA top 100 or the organizational top 5) has turned into one of the most valuable players on baseball’s most expensive team.
Scouting reports of Gardner as a minor leaguer seemed to largely typecast him as a speedy 4th-outfielder type who would get the bat knocked out of his hands once he faced some real major league pitching. His plate discipline, which noticeable from looking at his statistics, was largely chalked up to poor minor league pitching. After all, there’s no way a major league pitcher would a speedy singles hitter like Gardner, right? After walking 79 times in 2010, and being among the league leaders in pitches seen per plate appearance over the past few seasons, it looks like we can put that concern to rest.
In my opinion, Gardner was underrated in the minors for several reasons. One had to do with his physical appearence: his 5’10″ 185 lb. frame reminds nobody of an intimidating offensive threat, and more resembles Juan Pierre or Reggie Willits (two common comps for his potential ceiling), both useful players but ultimately limited enough offensively to prevent them from being legitimate starting-caliber players for the bulk of their career. These types of comps can often be very difficult to shake, and often become the lens through which the player is viewed for the bulk of his minor league career.
The second has to do with Gardner’s lack of minor league power. People who follow minor league prospects (myself included) are often intensely focused on power for both pitching and hitting prospects, and a guy who doesn’t have much home run power or a power fastball is often dismissed as a role player at best in the future. His plate discipline was noted, but it perhaps would have made more of an impression if it was accompanied by his pitches/at bat numbers.
Additionally, very few people saw Gardner’s elite defense coming. He was known to be an outfielder with top-notch speed, but he was criticized for not taking great routes to the ball. Instead, he often relied on his speed to bail him after making poor reads. Unlike his size or lack of power, this was ultimately a fixable defect, and fix it he did. Anyone who watches Gardner play left field today can see that his success is not only due to his blazing speed, but also to his quick reactions and great anticipation. Additionally, the lack of minor league defensive metrics make it hard to distinguish a good outfielder from an elite outfielder, where it might be easier to identify a good defensive catcher or infielder (where throwing is much more important).
So where does this leave us? Brett Gardner’s major league value is considerable, but a lot of that value is tied up in skills that are very difficult to quantify at the minor league level. As a result, he was consistently underrated throughout his minor league career. This brings me to the second question (also by Tom Swift): are there any Gardner-like players in the Yankee system that have been overlooked due to the current paradigm for evaluating prospects? Almost certainly. I’ll name a few guys who might be similarly overlooked, even if none of these players are likely to post a 6-WAR season anytime soon.
Offensively, overlooked guys (though less so these days) may have strong plate discipline, but a low batting average or unimpressive power production. Two guys immediately jump to mind here: Ramon Flores and Dante Bichette jr. Neither of these guys projects to have anywhere near the defensive value of Gardner, and both are projected to hit for more power, but both have shown an exceptional skill at drawing walks against minor league competition. Flores has walked 12.6 percent of the time in A-ball, while Bichette has walked in a whopping 18.5 percent of plate appearances in rookie ball. While these numbers may decrease as they move up, plate discipline tends to be a fairly sustainable skill. JR Murphy is another guy who has shown the ability to take a walk, though his stock is a little too high to be considered overlooked.
As for sleeper prospects with speed and defense, Ray Kruml and Melky Mesa spring to mind. They’re both in the same Trenton outfield, but they might have the speed to become valuable defensive outfielders if everything goes their way. They both have offensive shortcomings (and neither has shown any level of plate discipline resembling Gardner). Abe Almonte down in Tampa also has good speed and the tools to be a good defensive centerfielder (plus some decent plate discipline), but his inability to stay healthy or hit for average has held him back.
It’s hard to envision another Brett Gardner in the system, but of course, the minor league Brett Gardner was not projected to become the player he was today. It would be too strong to say he was an anomaly, but he is a rare case of a prospect being able to break through what was perceived to be his ultimate ceiling, and show significant improvements across the board. Whether it was the result of a tireless work ethic or untapped natural talents we’ll never know for sure, but it would be great for the Yankees to uncover some more Brett Gardner type prospects in the system. And as a prospector, I’ve definitely learned to pay closer attention to defense and plate discipline, even if they are difficult to quantify well at the minor league level.
If you enjoyed this article, please consider sharing it!
12 Responses to The lessons of Brett Gardner
Leave a Reply
TIQ IQ
Your post underscores how exceptional Gardner has been since becoming a full-time major league outfielder. There’s no reason for bloggers who follow the minors to question their approach. Most players with Gardner’s profile become exactly what you expected him to be — fourth outfielders whose skills make them unsuited to everyday use. Assessments of prospects is all about probabilities, and as such there will be a few players who defy expectations. We recognize this when talking about “elite” prospects such as Chamberlain or Hughes who ultimately disappoint our high hopes, so we should be happy at the other end of the spectrum when the rare lower-ceiling type succeeds beyond our hopes.
Gardner should be batting leadoff over Captain Can’t Hit Anymore. Instead he is being wasted in the #9 slot. The Yanks have gotten away with Gardner/Jeter in the 9/1 so far as they are only two games behind the Red Sox (with a very good chance of being one game back if they could dispatch of the As and Felix Hernandez can be King Felix against the Red Sox tonight), but I don’t think they’ll be so lucky in the postseason.
Bottom line is Gardner is a better hitter and all-around player than CCHA and should be getting the most plate appearances every game, not sitting in the dugout for as many as 2 2/3 innings if the first eight batters go down in order. I am of the school that you strike as early as possible and as early as the first batter of the game in a postseason game esp. when you are facing aces and #2s. The Yanks draw Detroit in the ALDS? Sabathia vs. Verlander? Jeter gets on base to leadoff the game. Ok, I want him stealing second and Granderson bunting him over to third cuz who knows when a Yank will reach 2B let alone get on base again against Verlander?
Let’s say it’s Game 7 of the ALCS, Yanks vs. Red Sox, Sabathia vs. Beckett, and it’s Gardner/CCHA in the 9/1. Who is more likely to get a hit or just get on base, steal second, steal third or move to third on a Granderson out, and score on a Teixiera sac fly (or A-Rod sac fly if Teixiera draws a one-out walk), Gardner or CCHA? I say Gardner, overall, regardless of Jeter’s first plate appearance BA and OBP is. If you wanna say Jeter in his first PA is a more likely candidate, ok, well he won’t steal as much, but let’s make it really interesting:
Seventh inning, no score, Sabathia and Beckett are pitching dual perfect games or they’ve put men on and erased them with double-plays so they’ve faced the minimum number of batters. I say Gardner is more likely to get on base to lead off the seventh, steal second, steal or move to third, and score on a sac fly than Jeter.
The beauty of this scenario is Gardner could get on base to lead off the seventh, steal second, be moved over to third by Martin, and CCHA could drive him in with a weak tapper to second, Yanks up and possibly winning the game 1-0 and going to the World Series. CCHA’s strikeout rate is so low this scenario is entirely possible and the funny thing is a weak groundout by Jeter would be perfect cuz it’s slow enough to drive in Gardner. Wouldn’t that be the realisitc at-bat from a #9 hitter since he’s usually the worst everyday player offensively?
Jeter strikes out once every 8.19 PA (8.1860465 to be exact (352 PA/43 SO.) His Strikeout Average ( KA = SO/PA) is .122, the lowest among everyday players. The perfect #9 contact hitter.
Whoops! I mean to say Teixiera is more likely to drive in Gardner in the seventh (Granderson moving Gardner over to 2B), same scenario as the first inning with Gardner getting on. The benefit of this seventh inning scenario is we may not see CCHA until the ninth inning since he’s batting ninth and hopefully the Yanks aren’t batting then i.e. still tied or trailing. Who in their right mind would prefer CCHA leading off the seventh with the minimum 20 Yanks set down over Gardner?
CCHA would be a perfect guy to drive in a run with an out since his strikeout rate is so low, is what I meant to say.
Why not Gardner in the #7 some games? It’s not leadoff but it’s often considered the leadoff slot for the bottom of the order by some romantics.
I defitnely remember the great Gardner debate of 2008 before I really got into advanced stats and all that jazz. The fact of the matter is when I saw Gardner he looked liked a 4th OF who could pinch run and be a defensive replacement. I thought the offense would not be suitable and once he got to the majors he would not only strike out more, but barely be able to get singles. And you know what, 2008 Brett Gardner personified everything what people expected of him. He was blazing fast, but as the saying goes “you can’t steal first”. Then what you know Gardner over the next three years not only becomes a league average hitter, but a well above average hitter with a 120wRC+ with elite defense and baserunning. To say that the Yankees got lucky with Gardner is understatement because he has been a better player every consecutive year for the last 5 which is pretty incredible.
I’ll admit it: I was horribly wrong on Gardner. I had serious doubts about his ability to be productive for any long stretch of time. I always thought he’d draw some walks but I thought that would fall off once pitchers realized he didn’t have enough power to warrant not challenging him. Perhaps we should pay more attention to the plate discipline skill in the minors. Yeah, a lot of that stuff is due to really shaky pitchers with crappy command, but if it’s repeated throughout levels, I think we can see that it means something.
That is why I like Ramon Flores especially with his age and level that he is playing at.
Agreed, to see a guy as young as Flores show great command of the strike zone is always encouraging.
I think a large part of the issue is that we value what we can measure and a great deal of BG’s value comes from his elite defense. There are no defensive stats in the minors to indicate that his defensive contribution could be so strong to make up for his more easily measured and observable lack of power.
Outstanding analysis, Eric. Here’s something else we should consider: the role that baseball intelligence has in player development. I use “baseball intelligence” to refer to the ability to figure out how the league has adjusted to you and adjusting your approach to compensate. In all sports, there is a constant process of adjustment and counter adjustment. It never stops. Right now, defenses are playing Mark Teixeira with an extreme shift and he hasn’t been able to adjust back. I don’t know how you measure baseball IQ (in the NFL, they make prospects take the Wonderlic in the Combines, but there is nothing like that I know of in pro baseball), but one way to observe it is to notice players who consistently have a better second half or second year at a new level. My recollection is that Gardner had a remarkable record in the minors of “figuring things out” and eventually excelling at every new level.
One factor that may also play into this is the timing of Gardner’s ascendance. Gardner has the good fortune of being a speed/defense guy at a time when we’re moving from a offensively dominated era to a defensively dominated one.
Good read. Totally agree Gardner came out from left field. Pun intended
First off, although power was not the best part of his game, Gardner had 10 minor league HR’s. He also has 12 Major League HR’s in 400 fewer plate appearances.
Power comes with better hip rotation and Gardner clearly uses his legs more as a hitter than he did when he first came up. Thanks to Kevin Long!
Second, Gardner was always a pretty good outfielder. Having seen him play in Staten Island in 2005, it appeared he made great plays every night. He also was pretty good in Trenton, too, on defense where I saw him play about a dozen times.
You talked about his route running but it was never really a problem. But if he did make a mistake (and no one is great on every deep fly ball), his speed was definitely a plus factor to record the out.
I saw Austin Jackson quite a bit in Trenton in 2008, and his route running was nothing great and he often used his speed to make up for bad routes. That is all part of being an outfielder. Fly balls are misjudged all the time, but speedy guys can make up for it. A plus for them which should be applauded, not made into a negative.
Third, you said the College of Charleston is not a “baseball powerhouse.” Um…yes they are. Not in the same realm with the ACC (North Carolina & Clemson) or SEC (South Carolina & Florida) teams but they made the NCAA Regionals both of Gardner’s final two seasons there.
Finally, one thing prospect junkies can do to improve their understanding of the decent Yankee farmhands is to actually watch them play. And more than once. Go see each level play a series or two during different parts of the season. See how certain players adjust to the long season and how they carry themselves in game situations.
You can tell a lot by watching these guys live. Are they gamers who do things to help a team win or are they stat hoarders who look to impress with their own “tools?”
And also stay away from the hype regarding players with “tools” or “high upside.” Tools are the biggest factor leading prospect junkies to certain players, but tools almost never translate to games. Toolsy players are a dime a dozen, but winning baseball players (like Brett Gardner, who has tons of baseball skills) are tough to find. And high upside guys almost NEVER reach even half their projected plateau.
Melky Mesa is one of the msot toolsy guys in the Yankee system (great arm, speed and power), but he stinks as a baseball player. Can’t recognize or hit a breaking pitch and is a strikeout waiting to happen every at bat.
Guys like Gardner, Nova (projected #3 starter) or even Adam Warren (projected back end rotation guy) will be better than projected because they are good baseball players willing to work hard to develop new parts of their game to improve as overall players.
That is hard to handicap unless you see them play. The problem with prospect junkies is that they read one negative from a single scout about a guy early in his pro career and that label sticks with them for their entire prospect life. Players have to be witnessed over time to properly judge his baseball skills. Players also improve quite a bit, and unless you see these guys working in the cage or during mid-week bullpens, you can never get a full reading on what they are doing to improve.