Remember me

Finding Nimmo

January 18, 2019
The NL leader in Adjusted Weighted Runs Created in 2018 was Christian Yelich, who posted an impressive 166 wRC+. He won the NL MVP award.
Paul Goldschmidt ranked third in wRC+. Anthony Rendon was fourth, Matt Carpenter was fifth, and Freddie Freeman was sixth. All of them were talked about as MVP candidates during the season.
And then there’s the NL player who ranked second in wRC+ in 2018: New York Mets outfielder Brandon Nimmo. He also finished second in OPS+, if you prefer that measure.
Nimmo didn’t receive any MVP support last season. That’s partially because his team was really, really awful last year, and it’s partially because while Nimmo had a fine season at the plate, he didn’t contribute much in any other area: he isn’t a great baserunner, and he’s not an elite defensive player.
And Nimmo’s traditional batting numbers aren’t nearly as impressive as the other players posting impressive mentioned. Here’s a table of the NL leaders in wRC+:
Christian Yelich
Brandon Nimmo
Paul Goldschmidt
Anthony Rendon
Matt Carpenter
Freddie Freeman
The other men have traditional batting lines that said ‘elite hitter.’ Brandon Nimmo has a traditional batting line that suggests "middle infielder during the 1990’s."
Brandon Nimmo wasn’t a serious MVP candidate, and he shouldn’t have been an MVP candidate. But there is good evidence that the Mets has quietly joined the echelon of the game’s best hitters.
Let’s look a little closer at his numbers. Here’s an extended 2018 stat summary:
Those numbers are not impressive. With the exception of Nimmo’s on-base percentage, there is little here to suggest that Nimmo belongs in the conversation with Paul Goldschmidt and Freddie Freeman.
The first clarifier is that Nimmo plays in a terrible park for left-handed hitters. According to Baseball Prospectus’ Runs Factor metric, left-handed batters in CitiField have suffered the second-most oppressive ballpark in baseball this year, bettering only the Marlins Park outcomes for right-handed hitters.  
Runs Factor
Nimmo’s split stats reflect this divide: he shows up as a much better hitter away from CitiField than at home:
Nimmo’s OPS split matches exactly the Runs Factor that Baseball Prospectus credits CitiField with. If you multiple Nimmo’s .945 road OPS by .87, you get .822, which is almost exactly what his actual OPS in CitiField was. That’s not good math, of course, but it’s nice when it works out.
Nimmo’s other flaw as a hitter is that he can’t hit lefthanders:
vs RHP
vs. LHP
Nimmo’s probably not as bad at hitting southpaws as he looks. if we assume that a portion of that .742 OPS is CitiField related, we can cut him some slack on his trouble with wrong-siders.
So Brandon Nimmo is an imperfect player. And he is also…understood in a certain light…an extremely interesting player. Maybe he can’t field or run all that great, and maybe he struggles a little bit against lefties, but Nimmo absolutely crushes righthanded pitchers. I don’t know if you’re aware of this, but most pitchers in baseball are right-handed.
And Nimmo is under team control for the next four seasons.
Which brings us to the most interesting aspect of Brandon Nimmo’s existence as a baseball player: he plays for the New York Mets.
*             *             *
The Mets are an organization that has been hamstrung by fiscal ineptitude. They have compounded that ineptitude by making organizational decisions that would have likely bankrupted any team that didn’t play in the richest market in American sports.
I should pull my punches more. Or maybe I am pulling my punches: the Mets of recent years have had an incredible opportunity. Blessed with a deep roster of incredibly talented pitchers, and blessed again contending in an NL East division that had one contending team (Washington) and three teams in stages of deep rebuild (Philadelphia, Miami, and Atlanta), the Mets had a terrific chance to have a mini-dynasty. For all that fortune, they’ve managed one improbable World Series run, a Wild Card loss, and two consecutive losing seasons. That’s not nothing, but it’s not what it could’ve been, either.
The Mets window of contention almost certainly closed last year: Atlanta joined the Nationals as a legitimately great team, and the Phillies aren’t far behind them. So how have the Mets adjusted to this? What has happened this offseason?
-          They hired an agent to be their GM. They lead their organization...someone with no background ever working within a baseball organization. They picked someone whose central work experience is in an industry that extracts money from baseball teams.  
-          They signed Jeurys Familia, a mid-level closer with a less-than-pleasant personal history, to a three-year, $30 million-dollar contract. 
-          They signed catcher Wilson Ramos to a two-year contract. I don’t have a problem with this move, but I thought I’d list it. They traded away Kevin Plawecki, which seems short-sighted, but this wasn’t egregious.
-          They traded a couple prospects and deadweight contracts for an elite closer (Diaz) and a very good second baseman (Cano) who is a) 36-year old, b) coming off a PED suspension, and c) about to enter the bad years of a mega-contract. I don’t mind this deal either, but I’m a big fan of Robinson Cano.
-          They signed Jed Lowrie, a thirty-five year old infielder coming off his best season, to a contract they had originally written for Ben Zobrist a few years ago. They found it stuffed in a drawer and ironed out the wrinkles.  
-          They acquired Keon Broxton (36.6% strikeout rate, career) for a team that already has a problem with strikeouts, and a glut of outfielders.
The Mets, in short, are going all-in. They’re pushing all their chips forward, with little consideration for what happens after 2019. They’re signing a bunch of old-ish and straight-up-old-old players to bolster a team that finished fourth in the division, despite having a pitcher that gave them a quality start every time his turn in the rotation rolled around.
This is a winning strategy, if your vision of winning is less about what happens on a baseball diamond, and more about throwing paint at a wall and hoping someone will call it a Picasso. Maybe the Mets will win this year, but I think it’s much more likely that Cespedes will be catching every third game by June, because that’ll be the only thing the Mets haven’t tried.
Understand: I am not usually so brazenly critical of anyone. It is my sincere belief is that most of you reading this article know more about baseball than I know, and it is my belief that most of the people entrusted with pulling the levers and twisting the knobs of major league teams know more than all of us.
The Mets are an exception. I think there is a very good chance that the people in charge of the Mets have no clear idea how good a player Brandon Nimmo is.
The record suggests as much. On July 24th of last year, Nimmo had a triple-slash line of .253/.374/.485. His on-base percentage was the best percentage on the team, by about forty points. His slugging percentage was about .002 off from being the best on the team.
The Mets dropped him seventh in the lineup the next three games. Then they tried him in the sixth slot. Then first, for a couple days. Then ninth. Then sixth. Over the last two months of the season, Nimmo spent more time hitting 6th or lower in the batting order than he did hitting 1st or 2nd.
How is that possible? How does that happen?
How, in this day and age, did the Mets come to the conclusion that Brandon Nimmo was a problem to their stuttering offense? This is a player that every advanced metric was already identifying as one of the best hitters in the league. This is a player, too, that happened to be outpacing all of his teammates in on-base and slugging percentage. Why did the Mets start rolling dice on where he was in the batting order? Why was he the one getting dropped? Were they only looking at his batting average? Is that how the Mets make lineup decisions, on batting average?
I don’t know. But this team has done so many things that fly in the face of common sense that the possibility can’t be ignored. The Mets really might not know what they have in Brandon Nimmo.
And if I were a G.M., I’d be making a real effort to find that out.
This is, in a way, a perfect storm for picking up a criminally overlooking a player. You have:
-          A player whose traditional statistics, deflated by a pitcher’s park and reduced further by batting seventh or eighth for most of the summer, don’t look nearly as good as they are,
-          A player who has one dimension of positive ability (torches right-handers) and a lot of neutral or negative markers,
-          A new management group that seems eager to make their mark by shelling out big dollars for older name players and moving young players to make space, and
-          A team that has a lot of guys jostling for a few spots in the outfield.
I’d be making offers. If I were a GM of a baseball team, I’d be working day and night to find out what the Mets are really looking for, and I’d offer it to them on a silver plate. Do you want a deep bullpen, like they've got in Colorado and the Bro? We can do that. Do they want a proper defensive centerfielder? We have one. Do they want another 100-mph thrower to damage? Tough, but we can swing it.
What do we want back? I don’t know…how about that Nimmo kid? He seems to have a little pop. Maybe we can find a platoon for him. Whaddasay? We got a deal?
Dave Fleming is a writer living in western Virginia. He welcomes comments, questions, and suggestions here and at 

COMMENTS (45 Comments, most recent shown first)

Don't rise to it, BB.
7:19 AM Jan 30th
So Goldie is satisfied with his assertion despite the fact that he hasn't studied the issue at all. Good to know.

I'll study the issue myself. I'm used to doing that because these days, one just can't rely on writers to get the facts straight. Writers push narratives more than anything. Case in point- see Goldie's comments below.
3:52 AM Jan 30th
How about Carter for Hubie Brooks, their shortstop; Mike Fitzgerald, the rookie catcher of last season; Herm Winningham, and Floyd Youmans?

Or Keith for Neil Allen and Rick Ownbey?

Syndergaaard/D'Arnaud for Dickey?

Preston Welson et al for Piazza?

The trades that got Sid? Cone? Ojeda? Darling? Clendenon?

The good trades only are ones that result in a World Series championship, seems sometimes to some people. You can't just count the misses and not the hits..
12:37 AM Jan 30th
Why not just say something like, well OK, I didn't necessarily mean it literally that they've been the worst, it sure feels that way to me and I think it's probably true, but yeah, I haven't done a systematic study and to tell the truth I don't particularly care if another team or two have been even worse....
1:11 PM Jan 28th
Steven Goldleaf
I'll be glad to review your extensive study of every MLB organization, showing the relative brilliance and dimness of each one's disposition of its young talent and the returns each trade got, which you seem to want badly enough to assign me the task of writing it, despite the fact that I am fully satisfied as to the truth of my assertions.

The way this works, see, is (as a wise man once said), "I don't work for you." (And would never in a million, zillion years, btw, so don't try offering me $$$, nice office space, company car, etc. I pick my employers very carefully, and you don't qualify.) You want the work done, YOU do the work.

There. That should shut you up. Oh, I forget--this is you. Nothing shuts you up.
6:37 AM Jan 28th
Goldie, I never said my team was the "smartest," "wisest," "all-knowing," etc. etc. Put away the strawman.

However, you on the other hand did say:

"Organizationally, there is no MLB club with as stalwart a record for brain-dead decisions as the Mets."

And yet you still haven't produced anything close to supporting that statement. Again, you were pushing a false narrative. This is what people do both in the sports world and outside of it. It is lazy thinking and unfortunately has become common place.

If you would like to present some sort of data supporting your statement, I'm all ears. Until then, stop digging.
7:06 AM Jan 27th
Bonds, let me guess that you never read fiction or poetry, since you obviously have no sensitivity to imagery. If all you want to read are dry literal assertions backed up by even drier numbers, your literary life will be very dull indeed.
9:37 AM Jan 25th
Steven Goldleaf
$10 words? What? Blood? Leg? Gotta support the team! Never believe what your lying eyes tell you. Your team is GREAT! The smartest, the wisest, the most all-knowing, all-foreseeing, all-discerning. Always was, always will be.

Get in touch when they deal Nimmo off for some rotting corpse. Until that day, toodle-loo!
7:08 AM Jan 25th
A lot of $10 words but zero facts. Once again you have failed to produce any evidence. Sorry Goldie but I deal in fact. I simply do not just accept the words (hyperbole) of a disgruntled former fan as truth.

The next time you make a baseball statement or any other statement for that matter, try providing some facts that will backup what you're saying; that way you'll be more convincing.
6:22 AM Jan 25th
Steven Goldleaf
Keep on rooting, Bondsy. LGM! YGB! That's what makes the game so great, this irrational jingoism in the face of all that's so obvious that it bites you in the ass while you say, blithely, "What fangs? Which toothmarks? Which rivulets of blood running down my leg? Please specify."
5:13 AM Jan 25th
Goldie, you said this:

"Organizationally, there is no MLB club with as stalwart a record for brain-dead decisions as the Mets."

Do you stand by your statement above? If so, do you have some sort of data or evidence that would support that statement? So far you haven't provided anything. Until you do I am only left to conclude that you were simply pushing a false narrative which I repeat, unfortunately happens far too often these days, both inside and outsise the sports world.

However if you do have evidence to support your statement, I'll be happy to see it. Feel free to post it or produce it in an article. I'm loking forward to seeing it.​
4:59 AM Jan 25th
Steven Goldleaf
I still maintain that the Hunt (and Hickman) for Davis deal was of the brain dead variety. You moved the goalposts when you introduced how they (sorta) pulled their asses out of the fire by making another, unrelated deal a year later that worked out well for them, like it was all part of some master plan or something. Sorry I indulged your fantasy there--it found it intriguingly questionable, but now I see that indulging you instead of pointing out the irrelevancy was my mistake.

I also never said they didn't make some good deals over the past 55 years, just that they've made some colossal boners of the type i'm describing, which I'm pretty sure they've been trying to make again with Nimmo only they can]t find someone overpaid, rapidly declining, and worthless enough quite yet.​
5:01 PM Jan 24th
Steven Goldleaf
Unfortunately, you see a great deal that I don't see at all.
4:55 PM Jan 24th
Actually you were hardly specific. Your first example, Hunt, ultimately ended up being a "non-dead brain" decision given that the initial Hunt trade was once removed from acquiring Tommie Agee. I think you would agree with that. A fan favourite to whom? You? How do you measure fan favourite? How do you measure hustle? If you have a way of measuring both fan favouritism and hustle, by all means do share.

Since I personally do not have a way of measuring fan favouritism and hustle I thought I would provide several examples of the Mets trading young talent for established veterans and doing quite. In my opinion that is still on topic unless your Mets brain dead theory is limited to only brain dead decisions that involve fan favourites and hustling players. All other Mets decisions are not brain dead decisions. Or instead of stating something that was accurate that you actually researched and studied, you were simply pushing a narrative. Unfortunately we see a lot of that these days.
4:40 PM Jan 24th
Steven Goldleaf
And is Person your idea of a "fan favorite"? A hustling player? Was he ever any good? Not that I remember. I never said "Don't ever trade anyone for anyone"--I was very specific in describing the type of senseless deals these brain-dead dodos persist in making.
3:39 PM Jan 24th
Steven Goldleaf
Cedeno? You mean the 24-year old outfielder they acquired after playing four years with the Dodgers? That Roger Cedeno?
3:34 PM Jan 24th

"Started with Ron Hunt actually: Good? Check. Young? Check? Hustles his ass off? Check. OK, send him somewhere asap for bupkis."

Do Hubie Brooks, Roger Cedeno, Robert Person, Preston Wilson belong in that category?
2:39 PM Jan 24th
Steven Goldleaf
Meanwhile, watch Nimmo closely, If the Mets get another offer to get some overpaid zhlub in the decline phase of his career in exchange for Nimmo, he's gone.
1:42 PM Jan 24th
Steven Goldleaf
We're talking about two separate issues here: 1) the churning of Hunt-for- (ultimately)-Agee, which I'm merely pointing out to be not so clearly productive as you maintain (although I can't argue with the results, and I'm not) and 2) the shitcanning of a young, talented, homegrown (not exactly, since Hunt was acquired by purchase in their first year of existence), hustling fan favorite, which is absolutely what they did, and is the pattern I'm discussing here.

You could well point to McReynolds as a fair exchange for Kevin Mitchell--I wont dispute that either, but simply show it off as yet another y., t., h., h.. f.f. shitcanned to acquire yet another established "star" who turned out to be nothing special.

I will take your suggestion as to future subjects for articles under advisement.
1:40 PM Jan 24th
So a trade that was basically Agee for Hunt ended up as at the very least a break even for the Mets and at best, the acquisition of a player who was instrumental in the Mets winning the World Series in 1969. That doesn't sound like a brain dead trade to me, Goldie.

Here is an idea: in your next article consider naming all of the "brain dead" trades the Mets have made over the years and then compare those trades to the brain dead trades of other teams. That way we can see if the Mets make more brain dead trades than other teams do.
12:55 PM Jan 24th
Steven Goldleaf
Interesting point, though, Bondsy. Considered as a straight Hunt-for-Agee swap, it's far from clear that Agee was the better player. Can't complain about the way 1969 turned out, of course, but if they had kept Hunt and played him at 3B, where they totally sucked in 1969, or moved Boswell to 3B and played Hunt at 2B, while playing Hickman in CF, I'm not sure the 1969 Mets wouldn't have been even stronger. There is no "stronger" than World's Champs, of course, and I don't like the idea of Hickman in CF at all, but that's not the point, which is to argue that Agee over Hunt isn't such a pure win-win-win. According to WAR, Hunt had 32.8 over his career (12 seasons, 1963-1974) while Agee had 25.2 (also 12, 1962-73).
11:25 AM Jan 24th
Steven Goldleaf
Not exactly "flipped." Davis played a year, 1967, for them and was the best hitter on that team. The fact that they dumped a vet a year later to get a young player has nothing to do with their initial goof, to say nothing of the fact that they dumped Jim Hickman, who had a few good years with the Cubs in the Hunt deal, too. Hunt was an on-base machine (Agee was not) and more to my point was the sort of hustling, gritty, hardnosed player they have traditionally under-valued. If they had actually "flipped" Davis (to make it seem a Hunt-for-Agee deal, with Davis as a temporary acquisition, in the same off-season) I might concede you had a point.
2:30 AM Jan 24th
Didn't the Mets trade Hunt and get back Tommy Davis, then flipped Davis for Tommie Agee? Pretty good trade in my humble opinion.
2:19 PM Jan 23rd
Also, a more general comment. I want to give Brodie the benefit of the doubt. I suspecct that maybe, with his background, he came in and looked in the Wilpon's beady little eyes and thought "these guys aren't going to pay to keep this rotation together. We have a window...maybe with success will come some more shekels."

But he had to dramatically shift the furniture to find nickels to do that. He dumped the Bruce and Swarzak contracts and got $20 mil cash on the Cano deal, however you feel about the overall trade. We did wind up with the number one closer and a still top five 2nd baseman in Cano. He couldn't afford Grandal but he got Ramos, a top ten at his position. Adding that to Conforto, a top ten leftfielder, and Nimmo we have a lineup with more punch and leather. Broxton is an elite glove with elite speed, something we haven't had in awhile. It is a shame he isnt a five toooler bit we can't afford five toolers.

I think the rotation gives us a punchers chance to win now, and the positon players and bullpen have been dramatically bolstered.

8:34 AM Jan 23rd
Great article, Dave.

I'm was also at sea a little on the WARPRC whatever, but I'm curious about this how it is affected by HBP?

In 2016, between majors and minors, Nimmo had 4 HBPs. In 2017 he had 4. In 2018 he had 23.

While obviously there are artists in this respect, I wonder if it something that would be consistently repeatable year after year. With broken hands.

Having watched Nimmo all year, I wonder about him and also McNeil....great hustlers, love the way they play the game, but are their great years with apparently average skills repeatable? Or are they at their absolute market peak?

8:17 AM Jan 23rd
Steven Goldleaf
Kevin Mitchell. Roger McDowell. Scott Kazmir. Head 'em up, run 'em off--Raw-HIDE!!!
4:18 AM Jan 23rd
Steven Goldleaf
Good pickup, Maris. That's how they seem to think of their young, hustling, homegrown players--as garbage to be unloaded on some team with a 35-year old veteran with six more good games in him to spare. It's like they're throwing out the trash.
9:07 AM Jan 22nd
(Get rid of, or try to get something for him?)
10:55 PM Jan 21st
For my money, they took too long to get rid of Wilmer Flores.
5:13 PM Jan 21st
Steven Goldleaf
Started with Ron Hunt actually: Good? Check. Young? Check? Hustles his ass off? Check. OK, send him somewhere asap for bupkis.
5:35 PM Jan 20th
Steven Goldleaf
Agree with steve161 or with me? it's a lovely place to watch terrible baseball. They love developing homegrown hustling players so they can quickly deal them off for nothing in return. How has Nimmo lasted even this long? Ty Wigginton, WIlmer Flores, Lenny Dykstra, it never stops.
4:50 PM Jan 20th
I agree about Citi Field.
(Including even the Dodger stuff!
Sue me.) :-)
3:35 PM Jan 20th
Steven, I have two points of minor disagreement.

1) Citi is a great place to watch a ballgame, even considering that it is full of New Yorkers;

2) Marlin management, past and present, may be brain-deader. The jury is still out on the current crop.

Otherwise: spot on.
2:06 PM Jan 20th
Steven Goldleaf
Organizationally, there is no MLB club with as stalwart a record for brain-dead decisions as the Mets. Amazingly, they have maintained this record for decades now, with only one decent showing, through colossal luck plus alignment of the stars, in 2015. Other than that one slipup, they have consistently outfumbled and screwed up every option available to them. I honestly don't understand how a fan in full possession of his or her mind could continue to support this clueless crew to this point. I jumped ship around 2007, finally, and was deeply ashamed to associate with flatlined stumblers and bumblers and fumblers for that long. THE CREW THAT COULDN'T SHOOT ITSELF IN THE FOOT STRAIGHT.

So--Nimmo. Did you know that the name "Nemo" is Latin for "no one"? True dat. See Charles Dickens' BLEAK HOUSE (an excellent name for Citifield, btw) where a minor but key character goes by "Nemo" to remain anonymous in the midst of a bustling London. I'm astonished, frankly, that they haven't found a way to shytcan this guy down to the minors so they could play some overpriced superannuated hasbeen, or deal him off for some middle reliever who promptly posts an ERA like the estimated cost for a lunar lander the size of a three-bedroom condo.
7:41 AM Jan 20th
Re his not being able to hit lefties: Besides what Dave said about the factor of the Park making the split look worse that how Nimmo really is, I'd say it's a good guess that he'd tend to do better and better with time, including with the benefit of seeing how last year compares to the year before.

Bill has written a lot about how the thing of players not being able to hit same-handed pitching is overblown, and (I'm paraphrasing here -- please anyone say if you think I'm not doing it well) that "platoon differential" is relatively uniform, within a range, for players in general -- which I take to mean that he thinks most players with such splits early in their careers will pretty much straighten it out, if given the opportunity.

And, here are Nimmo's platoon splits for the last 2 years, which are the only years in which he's had enough plate appearances to make it even half meaningful to look:
(the prior year he had just 7 AB's vs. lefties)

2017 vs. lefties, 49 PA's: .190/.292/.238
2018 vs. lefties, 151 PA's: .234/.351/.391

AND IN FACT, I'd say that in truth, Dave undersold Nimmo on this too, by presenting those 2018 stats as suggesting that Nimmo "can't hit lefties."
Those numbers aren't "can't hit lefties."
They're actually GOOD.

Here are the number for the league overall vs. lefties, including right-handed batters and including all parks, not taking account of Nimmo's very hitter-unfriendly home park:

Considering Nimmo's large advantage in on-base, his numbers vs. lefties were BETTER THAN league overall.

(Howdya like that!!!)

And now, let's look at the league's numbers at Citi Field -- OVERALL, not broken down by handedness of anybody:


I wish I knew how to find the breakdown for "vs. lefty pitchers" or just for lefty hitters overall; maybe one of you can find those, or say where I could.
But meanwhile, just look at that.
Half of Nimmo's record (more or less) was in that environment. Dave does make loud reference to that factor, but I think looking at it this way makes it even bolder.

Cliff's Notes: It's false to view Nimmo's stats of last year as showing that he's at all weak vs. lefties, and there's reason to believe he's likely to get better against them.

2:49 PM Jan 19th
There has to be one who actually has the job of a GM.
12:28 PM Jan 19th
That's where he belongs in the order, period. (Apologies to Sean Spicer. No, forget it, no apologies to Sean Spicer.)

And, there's another reason to put him up there, although it's not an objective thing....not objective but undeniable. The only fuzzy thing about it is how important you think it is and whether it's especially valuable at the top of the order:

He's an intense hustler.
11:31 AM Jan 19th
So I check Nimmo's Baseball Ref page. Not only does Nimmo draw walks like crazy, like I expected from his terrific on-base percentage cited here, but he also led the league in getting hit by pitches with 22, despite sitting out about 40 games.

So that hikes his on-base ability even more.

Lordy, I'd put him in the No. 1 or No. 2 spot in the batting order in a New York minute (pun partly intended).
8:34 AM Jan 19th
There only has to be one.
8:19 AM Jan 19th
You're making the assumption that there are numerous GMs smarter than whoever the Mets GM is.

A faulty assumption, to be sure.

3:51 AM Jan 19th
Vent: So, what's the deal about that guy?

Not that I think this has anything to do with why you gave the link, but if it were a webpage on The Onion I'd be less surprised about what I find there.

"Fritz Dorish"?? Gimme a break. There was such a player?
And, even from not long before I started the game -- well into the Topps card era, and a guy who played for 10 years, played a dam lot, was sort of good -- I mean, his top comps include Cal Koonce :-) (not to mention Wilcy Moore) -- and I never heard of him.

Actually, come to think of it, "Harry Dorish," which is his real name, does ring a little bit of a bell.....
8:31 PM Jan 18th
Just to balance the equation ... Nimmo's power numbers were a good bit better in New York than they were in the minors, something that seems to happen a lot lately. And his babip was .365. If you normalized it to, say .300, he's still good -- he IS good -- but it might be optimistic to expect him to be among the five best hitters in 2019.

But that's just nitpicking. Good read, Dave. And nice job, finding Nimmo. Now go find this guy:
4:20 PM Jan 18th
No, Steve, it doesn't; that's only about a limited aspect of park factor -- interesting and important, but the overall 'Park Factor factor' is a more basic and stronger point.
1:58 PM Jan 18th
No, Maris, I think you forgot what you read. The discussion of park factor comes immediately after the passage you quoted.

As for the main point: I agree, I'm also a Nimmo fan. Does the Mets' new management know what they have in him, enough to explain to their manager that he might have missed something in his first year with the team? Or are they as clueless as their owners?

It's hard to know what to make of the new GM. On the one hand, he has clearly improved the team, both via addition and via subtraction. On the other, they haven't exactly got younger, and the trade for Cano has the side effect of leaving one of their more promising under-30s without a position.

Hard to imagine them really competing with the Braves and the Nats--and maybe even the Phils--but they'll be worth watching for more than the best announcing team in baseball.
1:05 PM Jan 18th
Nice article. I'm with it. I likewise was puzzled at some of how the Mets handled him last year. (The only reason I was merely puzzled rather than beside myself is that I'm not really a Met fan.)
BTW from what I can gather, the Met fans totally got it about Nimmo, even if the team didn't.

It would have been good in such an article to explain what exactly is "Adjusted Weighted Runs Created." I sure don't know, which isn't necessarily indicative :-) but I'd bet that many of our members don't know, and I'd put a few nickels that most don't exactly know.
(Yes, I'll go and look it up.)

You inadvertently undersell him in one part of the article:

AB 427, R 77, H 111, BA .260, HR 17, RBI 47, SB 9, OBP .402
Those numbers are not impressive. With the exception of Nimmo’s on-base percentage, there is little here to suggest that Nimmo belongs in the conversation with Paul Goldschmidt and Freddie Freeman.

They're impressive, even without taking account of the things that you go on to point out, plus his team's basic Park Factor which you mention only at the very end of the article, in passing, and not at all in this context (I think really that you just forgot; obviously you know it and maybe you figured everybody reading this knows it, but really I think you just forgot).

Plus, of course, saying "with the exception of on-base percentage" is kind of odd, kind of like.....well I don't need to give any analogy, but the Lincoln/Ford's Theater thing will do.

But, back to the basics: Good article, and I think your points are extremely well taken.
10:28 AM Jan 18th
©2024 Be Jolly, Inc. All Rights Reserved.|Powered by Sports Info Solutions|Terms & Conditions|Privacy Policy