Comparing the Shortstops

Someone at the Big Jab forums (which I don't really participate in any longer) pointed out this article from Kevin Hench at Fox Sports, in which he compares the three "prize" free agent shortstops from this past winter: Edgar Renteria, Orlando Cabrera and David Eckstein. I'm going to ignore OC, because I truly believe that Renteria is worth $2 million per year more than Cabrera, and because the article is written from a "what a bargain Eckstein is" perspective. I'm also going to ignore at this time the folly in analyzing the relative worth of any of these signings after only 40 games. It's simply too early to tell.

While I don't necessarily disagree with the sentiment (Renteria is not worth 4 times Eckstein, especially given the guys coming up through Boston's minor league system), I do find fault with some of the analysis. While it's technically true that Renteria's career OPS is only 40 points higher than Eckstein's (it's actually 46 points - 746 to 700 - excluding this season), it's also true that this comparison punishes Renteria for being a better ballplayer. Edgar Renteria, while seven months younger than Eckstein, made it to the majors five years before his scrappy little counterpart. While David Eckstein was finishing college and working his way through the minor leagues, Renteria was playing full time in the majors, generally in ballparks that favor pitching. In those five years, Renteria posted a .721 OPS.

The better comparison between the two is over the last four years - the time that Renteria and Eckstein have both been in the major leagues. Over that time frame (excluding this season) Renteria's OPS advantage is huge: 776 to 700. Compared to league averages and ballpark adjusted, Renteria has an OPS+ of 105 over that time vs. 87 for Eckstein. Due to the somewhat funky way that OPS+ is calculated, this means that Renteria has been about 10% better than Eckstein with the bat. Looked at another way, Renteria has been more durable, averaging about 10 games per season more, and has created an average of 84 runs/season vs. Eckstein's 64 RC/season. Those 20 extra runs are worth about two wins per year.

Hench talks quite a bit about the defense, especially this year. I'm not certain how much to trust most defensive metrics, but Eckstein actually comes out ahead of Renteria on many (fielding %, zone rating, and Baseball Prospectus' metrics), which may be a bit surprising given Renteria's Gold Glove reputation. The question left unanswered (and difficult for me to answer) is, by how much does the fielding difference (if there is one) offset the offensive difference. Hench seems to rate them equally, but is that really the correct approach? I don't believe so, but I'm not sure where it all falls out.

My final beef is Hench's contention that the Sox "chose to invest money that might have helped retain Pedro Martinez or Derek Lowe in Renteria." That statement is patently untrue. The Red Sox had decided months earlier (before the season ended) that they weren't going to meet Lowe's salary demands, and they only signed Renteria after Pedro was offered an extra year by the Mets and chose to sign with them. The Renteria signing didn't come into play in the decision not to resign either pitcher. This is very sloppy reporting, in my opinion.

Could the Red Sox have saved some money without losing much on the field, had they signed Eckstein over Renteria? I would say that they certainly could have. But the Sox aren't in business to make a couple dollars of profit in the regular season, they are in business to win championships and make a bigger profit in the postseason. Those two wins or so (could be more - Renteria has shown a much bigger upside) provided by Renteria could be the difference between October baseball and October golf. Given time, I believe this deal will pan out for Boston.