Comparing Chase Headley With Jacoby Ellsbury

It’s pretty easy to poke holes in Chase Headley’s free agent case. Three years ago, he was one of the best players in baseball, but it was based on an anomalous power spike that immediately regressed and has yet to reappear. For the last couple of seasons, he’s essentially been a slightly above average hitter, and while he’s produced +8 WAR over those two years, that value is heavily based on his defensive contributions, which teams generally haven’t paid market price for.

If you don’t think Headley is an elite defender, then he’s basically just a good role player, a solid contributor but not any kind of star. And he’s now heading into his decline phase, and since defense peaks early, you probably want to regress that aspect of his value more heavily going forward.

Interestingly, however, that entire paragraph also applied to a member of last year’s free agent class, and the player who fit that same description signed a seven year, $153 million contract. That player, of course, is Jacoby Ellsbury, and his contract with the Yankees was the third largest deal handed out last winter; only Robinson Cano and Masahiro Tanaka received larger paydays than Ellsbury. Ellsbury and Headley aren’t really the same kind of player, but they hit free agency with similar kinds of pros and cons.

And their career numbers are actually pretty darn similar.

Or, if you prefer, their numbers from the three seasons prior to hitting the free agent market.

Ellsbury’s lower strikeout rates lead to a higher batting average, but Headley’s walks make up the difference in on-base percentage, and the slugging difference is due solely to Ellsbury’s additional singles already being captured in batting average; their Isolated Slugging marks are almost identical. Once you adjust for the ballparks they’ve played in, Headley’s overall batting line actually grades out slightly better from a career perspective, and exactly the same on the three year timeline.

Of course, Ellsbury didn’t get paid for just what he does at the plate, as it is his overall game that make him one of the game’s better players. Ellsbury’s an elite baserunner, while Headley is, well, not. Ellsbury’s a center fielder and Headley is a third baseman, so even if you think Headley’s a very good defender at third base, Ellsbury’s ability to play an up-the-middle position will be more valued by Major League teams. And Ellsbury hit free agency heading into his age-30 season, rather than the age-31 season that Headley is selling, so he got a little bit of a youth premium that Headley will not get.

I won’t attempt to argue that teams should be lining up to give Headley the kind of contract that Ellsbury received last winter. In many ways, Headley is an old-player skills type, and Tony Blengino showed that his power decline the last few years can’t all be explained away by the effects of Petco Park. Guys like Ellsbury historically age pretty well, but Headley’s walking a fairly thin line; any loss of bat speed, and he’s probably a platoon player whose only real asset is his glove.

But when looking at Headley’s contract — he reportedly has a four year, $65 million offer on the table — this winter, we can’t entirely ignore Ellsbury’s deal from last winter. Like Headley, Ellsbury’s been mostly an average hitter who had one big power spike several years ago. Like Headley, Ellsbury’s status as an impact player depended heavily on the importance of defense, rather than simply judging him on his performance at the plate. Perhaps we shouldn’t be too surprised that the team that signed Ellsbury is also the team that traded for Headley in July. Or the one that plays Brett Gardner in left field. Or just traded for Didi Gregorius.

The Yankeees pretty clearly value defense, but they wouldn’t have had to spend $153 million to sign Ellsbury unless someone else put a high value on his non-hitting skills as well. And given that the Yankees are apparently not the team that made the 4/$65M offer to Headley, it seems that they aren’t the only team to see Headley as a valauble player either. While he doesn’t measure up to traditional standards of an impact player, Headley has produced +3.5 WAR per 600 plate appearances over his career, and even if you knock some of that down for aging and defensive regression, you’re still looking at a guy who is pretty easily an above average big leaguer.

The question isn’t whether Headley is as valuable as Ellsbury. The market is confirming that no Major League team thinks that Headley is Ellsbury’s equal, regardless of their career numbers, or the projections that actually think Headley might be as good or better in 2015. Teams clearly don’t think Headley is Ellsbury’s equal, but how big do we think the gap really is between them? How much more valuable does Ellsbury’s athleticism and speed make him? How much more emphasis should we put on Ellsbury’s defense in center field than we do Headley’s glove at third base? How much more do you pay for the fact that Ellsbury hit the market a year younger, or has a skillset that will likely age a bit better?

Ellsbury is worth more, but the performance differences don’t suggest that Headley is worth half of Ellsbury’s future contributions. And yet, even at $65 million, Headley’s reported best offer would earn him 42% of what Ellsbury for last winter. Even just ignoring the extra years, 4/$65M for Headley would pay Headley just 73% of Ellsbury’s AAV, and Ellsbury’s annual salary would have been higher had he settled for a four year deal.

Keep Ellsbury in mind as you hear a lot of shock and dismay about a player like Headley signing for the kind of money he’s reportedly going to get. He might not fit any particular kind of type that star players usually look like, but even in his down years, Headley has been a league average hitter with a very good glove. For all intents and purposes, Headley has been what Jacoby Ellsbury would be if you took away his speed. Is baserunning really so valuable that makes up the difference between $65 million and $153 million? It certainly matters, but does it matter enough that we should be skeptical that Headley is even worth a fraction of what Ellsbury got last year?

I don’t think so. I think that, even at this price, Headley has a chance of being a pretty nifty bargain.