Honoring Derrek Lee

by
November 24, 2009

One of the upsides of downtime during the off-season is the freedom it allows for one to stumble upon tidbits and performances he missed throughout the season. Consider this one: Derrek Lee had a .412 wOBA last season. I’m ashamed to admit I missed out on it. Oh, I saw his name on the WAR leaderboards, skimmed the 35 home runs, and caught a dozen or so Cubs games throughout the season, but for whatever reason my mind’s Shamwow didn’t work on Lee’s .306/.393/.579 slash line.

That doesn’t compare to his magical 2005 season in which he posted a.446 wOBA and .335/.418/.662, but hey, that season was probably one of the best non-Pujols/Bonds/Rodriguez offensive seasons we’ve seen over the last decade. Back to his 2009, the only number that really stands out as a bit of a fluke is his increased HR/FB and even that isn’t too far out of his career norm. Lee’s ISO went through the roof and that twin-killing bug he caught during 2008 (27 GIDP) left his system abruptly. In fact, his 2007 and 2009 season totals add up to 27 GIDP, which tells you how odd last year really was.

Lee turns 35 during next season and sees his contract expire at season’s end. He’s still a capable first baseman and it’ll be interesting to see where he lands if the Cubs don’t work towards an extension. Maybe it’s time for me to make use of the “My Team” function on here.





 

23 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
CircleChange11
14 years ago

I posted this in commentary on another subject, but IMO, why we all did not notice Lee’s season was because he started out not doing so well (compared to his past performance) when Aramis was injured. Once ARam returned, Lee’s performance took off.

DLee (1st Half) – 280/354/511
DLee (2nd Half) – 336/436/656

By the time Lee’s performance was on a major upswing, the Cubs were a disaapointment, and all the attention on the Cubbies were [1] how Soriano went from the Penthouse to the Outhouse, and [2] the “failure” of Milton Bradley.

Derrek Lee is just one of those players everyone likes, regardless of your favorite team.

IIRC, Lee was also playing through an early season injury (pinched nerve in his neck, and some back issues). He tried to play through it and was struggling. So, it wasn’t all “Ramirez’s return” … ARam came back AND DLee got healthy.

Attending some Cubs games with really good seats (my 8yo son love em … tragic), and watching DLee in pre-game and in-game, the guy is just athletic as heck, even at 6-5. It doesn’t appear that he’s lost much of his athleticism and I have only one concern with his next 3 years … and that is that neck and back injuries seem to be “re-ocurring” namely due to act of swinging a baseball bat and the torque it places on the spine.

0
John
14 years ago
Reply to  CircleChange11

While I mostly agree, Lee batted .189 in April, then .313/.339/.295 May/June/July, so I think it was more a horrendous start than a full bad half. The power didn’t seem to come until June, though.

0
joser
14 years ago
Reply to  CircleChange11

He definitely got off to a slow start, but what does Aramis Ramirez have to do with it? This isn’t the protection argument again, is it?

0
CircleChange11
14 years ago
Reply to  joser

I understand that here, at fangraphs, a study comparing the “protection value” of a batter with SLG of .450+ applies to EVERY situation in baseball regardless of whether we’re talking about a “protection” batter with a SLG of .460 or .550 or .600.

Of course, it’s correlation instead of causation, or luck, or small sample size, or something else … but the one thing it CANNOT be is that not having Ramirez in the lineup affected how Lee was pitched or Lee’s approach at the plate. It has to be *anything* but that because a study examining a general sample has to be apllied to every situation.

God forbid, someone look at something on a case-by-case basis, and consider all of the individual aspects of the situation.

Derrek Lee got healthier and Ramirez returned to the lineup. I’ll leave it to the know-it-alls to determine what % of performance is attributed to each specific aspect.

But, I suppose the fangraph’s opinion is that Ramirez’s absence had no measurable affect on Lee’s performance. *Shrugs* …or Clark’s on McGee and Her, or rickey’s and Canseco’s on Lansford, or Bonds’ on Kent’s performance, etc. You guys let me know when correlation become causation … or what % of influence one situation has on another.

It’s just a coincidence, why don’t I just accept that as indisputable fact?

0
CircleChange11
14 years ago
Reply to  joser

I looked up Lee’s individual seasons stats: 1st Half v. 2nd Half …

[1] Through 2003, he was a much better player in the 2nd half then he was the in 1st half, perhaps even giving the appearance of being a “slow starter”.
[2] In 2004, he completely flipped to being better in the 1st half than in the 2nd half.

2004 was his first year with the Cubs. This was his first year in Chicago where his 1st half numbers were not well above his 2nd half numbers.

We can speculate why. In the end we end up with varying levels of probability or confidence in our conclusion based on the different weighting we place on various aspects/sources. But, neither of us will be able to say, for certain, why DLee had such a poor start in 09 after being a “1st half player” in Chicago over the last 4 seasons.

His BABIP in the 1st half was way down, and in the 2nd half way up (I’m not one of those that chalks it up to “really bad luck” anbd “really good luck”)

K-rate is about the same, walk rate is down in the 1st half. Makes me wonder if the lower walk rate, combined with the way down BABip, if in the 1st half he was “pressing” due to trying to over-compensate for Aramis’s absence (swinging at pitches he might usually lay off of, perhaps borderline strike/ball pitches on corners, harder pitches to make good contact on), if he was getting pitched differently, or if he was battling through an injury … or some combination of all 3 or something else.

0