The Value of Kyle Schwarber

Ten days from the trade deadline, we usually spend most of our time talking about whatever star player is eligible for free agency at years end, and is on a non-contending team looking to upgrade for the future. David Price, Johnny Cueto, and Yoenis Cespedes last year, for instance. This year, though, that guy doesn’t exist; the big pending free agents on rebuilding teams are guys like Rich Hill and Jay Bruce. And because of the dearth of quality players likely to change teams over the next week and a half, the guy who is generating the most conversation leading up to the deadline is… Kyle Schwarber?

Yes, at this point, the hot name that everyone wants to talk about is an injured 23-year-old catcher/outfielder who won’t be healthy enough to play again until next year. Despite the Cubs best efforts to tamp down rumors, leaks out of New York keep suggesting that Schwarber is the guy the Yankees covet, and given the Cubs well-known interest in Andrew Miller, there appears to be mutual interest in players from both sides, with a stand-off emerging over whether the Cubs should surrender Schwarber in a deal for the game’s best left-handed reliever.

The Cubs continue to insist they aren’t going to do it, seeing the move as shortsighted, giving up too much long-term value for a short-term boost. Their Wednesday night acquisition of Mike Montgomery gives them a quality lefty to stick in their bullpen, and relieves some of the pressure to pay the going price for Miller, though, of course, I’m sure they’d still love to have him. But it seems they’d like to acquire him while retaining Schwarber, preferring to have both on next year’s roster as they make perhaps their final run with Jake Arrieta at the front of their rotation.

But if the Yankees hold fast, and say it’s Schwarber-or-nothing, are the Cubs wisely protecting their future, or passing up an opportunity to increase the odds of bringing Cubs fans their first World Series title since 1908? Well, it all depends on what you think Kyle Schwarber is going to turn into.

Most of the discussion surrounding Schwarber’s value has been tied to his defensive value, or lack thereof. A fringy catcher, the Cubs appeared to settle on him as a left fielder, believing he was athletic enough to be a reasonable defender out there, even if he wasn’t ever going to be an asset in the field. Those who were optimistic about his defense out there saw a potentially average glove, and if he was an average defensive left fielder, he’d be a valuable player indeed, given his offensive skills.

You Aren't a FanGraphs Member
It looks like you aren't yet a FanGraphs Member (or aren't logged in). We aren't mad, just disappointed.
We get it. You want to read this article. But before we let you get back to it, we'd like to point out a few of the good reasons why you should become a Member.
1. Ad Free viewing! We won't bug you with this ad, or any other.
2. Unlimited articles! Non-Members only get to read 10 free articles a month. Members never get cut off.
3. Dark mode and Classic mode!
4. Custom player page dashboards! Choose the player cards you want, in the order you want them.
5. One-click data exports! Export our projections and leaderboards for your personal projects.
6. Remove the photos on the home page! (Honestly, this doesn't sound so great to us, but some people wanted it, and we like to give our Members what they want.)
7. Even more Steamer projections! We have handedness, percentile, and context neutral projections available for Members only.
8. Get FanGraphs Walk-Off, a customized year end review! Find out exactly how you used FanGraphs this year, and how that compares to other Members. Don't be a victim of FOMO.
9. A weekly mailbag column, exclusively for Members.
10. Help support FanGraphs and our entire staff! Our Members provide us with critical resources to improve the site and deliver new features!
We hope you'll consider a Membership today, for yourself or as a gift! And we realize this has been an awfully long sales pitch, so we've also removed all the other ads in this article. We didn't want to overdo it.

But from my perspective, the conversation about Schwarber’s defensive questions have perhaps overshadowed the fact that we shouldn’t be entirely certain that Schwarber is going to be a great hitter.

Schwarber was certainly impressive in his debut last year, running a 131 wRC+ in the regular season, then mashing his way to a 249 wRC+ in the postseason. Putting the two together — since there’s no reason to ignore his postseason performance — Schwarber put up a 143 wRC+ during his rookie year. For reference, Kris Bryant has a 139 wRC+ during his time in the big leagues (postseason included), so yeah, it’s easy to see why Schwarber got the entire city excited about what he could do at the plate.

But when we look under the hood a little bit, I think there are reasons to believe that Schwarber will have a tough time repeating his 2015 success at the plate over a larger sample.

For instance, I think his contact rate presents a legitimate area that will require improvement if Schwarber is going to become the kind of hitter the Cubs are hoping he will be. Last year, Schwarber made contact on just 67% of his swings, and perhaps more importantly, only 75% of his swings on pitches in the strike zone. It’s perfectly normal for a young hitter to chase pitches out of the zone early in their career, then learn the strike zone and make adjustments as they get older, so low out-of-zone contact rates aren’t as concerning, but swinging and missing at pitches in the zone is a more challenging correction.

Dating back to 2008, there have been 620 player-seasons in which an age-25-or-younger hitter has come to the plate at least 250 times. Of those 620 player-seasons, Schwarber’s 2015 in-zone contact rate ranked 614th, so this wasn’t just your run-of-the-mill low-contact rate for a young power hitter. The only players who had posted lower in-zone contact rates during a season? George Springer, Mark Reynolds, Chris Davis, Jon Singleton, and Oswaldo Arcia. Chris Carter was a few tenths of a percentage point ahead of Schwarber, and Justin Upton wasn’t far off either, but if you keep going up the list, you see Mike Olt, Mike Zunino, Joc Pederson, Junior Lake, Wladimir Balentien, and Michael Taylor.

These are the kinds of young hitters that struggled to make contact on pitches in the zone at a similar rate to Schwarber. And if you look at how they developed after putting up those marks, it’s not necessarily a super encouraging group.

Low Contact Hitters
Player Low Z-Contact% Career Z-Contact% Career wRC+
George Springer 70% 76% 126
Mark Reynolds 70% 74% 103
Chris Davis 72% 78% 121
Jon Singleton 72% 72% 79
Oswaldo Arcia 73% 75% 100
Chris Carter 75% 76% 111
Justin Upton 76% 81% 120
Mike Olt 76% 74% 60
Mike Zunino 76% 78% 73
Chris Davis 76% 78% 121
Joc Pederson 76% 79% 113
Junior Lake 77% 80% 81
Wladimir Balentien 77% 78% 69
Michael Taylor 77% 78% 71
Matt Joyce 77% 84% 114
Wilin Rosario 77% 83% 94
Jackie Bradley Jr. 78% 82% 93
Kris Bryant 78% 79% 141
Avisail Garcia 78% 83% 87
Elijah Dukes 78% 83% 110

Those are the 20 hitters who posted a Z-Contact% below 78% in a 25-or-younger season since 2008. As you can see, most of them did improve their in-zone contact rates, with George Springer, Chris Davis, and Justin Upton making the biggest leaps forward, each getting their career Z-Contact% up five or six percentage points over their lowest single-season mark. The overall average was a three percentage-point improvement, we should expect Schwarber to make more contact as he develops.

But also note that, of the 20 hitters on that list, there’s exactly one guy who might be considered a great hitter: Kris Bryant. Davis and Upton have had a couple of great seasons at the plate, but overall, they’ve been more good hitters than great hitters. Starting from a base this low in terms of in-zone contact rate means that Schwarber probably can’t be expected to become more than an average hitter for contact, even with future development, and that puts a lot of pressure on his contacted balls to produce value to make up for all the swings and misses.

Now, it’s easy to just look at Bryant and say “hey, we’ll take a left-handed Bryant, no problem.” And certainly, if Schwarber could do anything close to what Bryant can do at the plate, he’d be a franchise cornerstone, even with the defensive question marks. But there’s one pretty big difference between Schwarber and Bryant: handedness.

Schwarber is a left-handed hitter, which means teams can and will aggressively align their defenses to combat his pull tendencies. As a lefty who pulled 47% of his balls in play as a rookie, Schwarber was an obvious shift candidate, and as such, he saw three defenders on the right side of the bag in 62% of his plate appearances last year. Bryant is also a bit of a pull hitter (though less extreme than Schwarber, at 44% for his career), but as a right-hander, he’s simply more difficult to defend, since teams aren’t as willing to put three players on the left side of the infield; Bryant has only hit with the shift on in 36% of his plate appearances.

As such, Bryant has been able to run a .355 BABIP in his first year and change as a big leaguer; it’s one of the primary reasons he’s been such a good hitter even with an above-average strikeout rate. But that is just an unreachable level for Schwarber; left-handed pull-hitters simply don’t run BABIPs that high in this day and age of defensive positioning.

Go look at the normal range of BABIPs for high-pull lefties over the last three years. Even the guys who hit the ball the hardest — guys like Chris Davis, David Ortiz, and Anthony Rizzo — now run BABIPs in the .280 to .290 range. These are the guys the shift is designed to do the most damage to, and Schwarber is going to be part of the group that is most hurt by modern defensive positioning. Not surprisingly, even though he hit the ball very hard last year, Schwarber ran just a .293 BABIP, and we probably shouldn’t expect much of an increase from that.

But, of course, we’re not saying Schwarber’s 2015 BABIP was an unsustainable fluke, and he was a good hitter while getting shifted last year, so who cares? Well, that’s true to an extent. But there is one part of Schwarber’s 2015 batting line that we probably shouldn’t expect to continue, and it was one of the main reasons he was so productive last year; he had an absurdly high percentage of extra base hits clear the fence.

Postseason included, Schwarber hit 21 home runs last year, but only six doubles and one triple, so 75% of his extra base hits were home runs. That’s why Schwarber had a .273 ISO, just a tick shy of Giancarlo Stanton’s career .274 mark. Except no one, not even Stanton, has ever shown that they can turn that rate of well-struck balls into home runs.

Over the last 10 years, in fact, no player has even managed to put up a HR/XBH rate of even 60%. Among qualified hitters, the highest percentage of extra base hits to go for home runs from 2007-2016 belongs to Adam Dunn, at 59%. Jim Thome comes in at 58%, then you have Russell Branyan and Chris Carter at 57%, Jason Giambi at 56%, and Alex Rodriguez at 55%. The modern super-sluggers, Stanton and Davis, are both at 54%. These are the kings of old player skills, the three-true-outcome stars who swing for the moon on every pitch, and they’re all showing that having 60% of your extra base hits go for home runs is a practical limit.

So, realistically, Schwarber isn’t going to keep getting so many of his extra base hits to go over the fence. If you give him a still-top-of-the-slugger-chain 55% HR/XBH rate, then he would distributed his 2015 extra base hits as 12 doubles, one triple, and 15 home runs, instead of 6/1/21. Just that change would have cost him 12 total bases from last year, knocking his slugging percentage down by 50 points, and that’s with an optimistic view of his power output, putting him in the same class as guys like Stanton and Davis.

Stacking up all these potential concerns, and I think it’s reasonable to be a little skeptical of the idea that Schwarber is definitely going to develop into an elite hitter. Left-handed pull hitters with low contact rates need to be monsters when they hit the ball, and Schwarber’s extra base hit profile simply leaned too heavily to the home run side of things to be sustainable long-term. Take away a few of those homers, and now the skillset is starting to look more like Mike Napoli.

There’s definitely nothing wrong with Mike Napoli. He’s had a very nice career, putting up +27 WAR as a slugging C/1B. And his walk, strikeout, and ISO rates look right in line with reasonable projections for Schwarber’s future. As a right-handed hitter, he’s been able to run a .308 career BABIP, which might be a bit higher than we should expect from Schwarber, but something in that 120 to 125 wRC+ looks about right, based on the things he does well and his areas of weakness.

That’s a good hitter. That’s a guy you want in your line-up. But as a guy who still does have questions about his eventual defensive value, and is coming off knee surgery, Schwarber’s upside looks a bit limited to me. Could he start hitting for a lot more contact and hit 40 bombs a year? Sure, anything is possible; Jose Altuve is a slugger now, after all. But should we expect it? I don’t think so, not based on what we know right now. And if he’s a defensively-challenged, good-not-great hitter, he’s probably worth something like +1 to +3 WAR per season, depending on what the defense turns out to be.

Now, that brings us to the inevitable question of his value compared to that of Andrew Miller. After all, we can’t talk about Schwarber’s shortcomings without mentioning that Miller can only face six or seven batters per game before he has to be removed. Given the fickle nature of relief pitching, it’s not like Miller is a franchise player either, and it’s easy to see why the Cubs might not want to give up five years of a potential above-average everyday player for two and a half years of a reliever. After all, if Schwarber is even just an average player, you’re giving up something like +10 WAR in future production, and the Cubs would be lucky if Miller gave them +5 WAR over the next two-and-a-half years.

But we also need to factor in the discount that has to be put on future value compared to present value. Especially for a team like the Cubs, wins today are worth a lot more than wins in 2021, and given that Schwarber has the kind of skillset that gets overpaid in arbitration, he might not actually be much of a value in four or five years anyway.

How much you want to discount future wins is far more art than science, and will be different for every team. For an organization like the Cubs, with a real chance to win the World Series for the first time in 108 years, I think you have to put a pretty significant discount on future wins. So, just for the fun of it, here’s what Schwarber and Miller’s future value to Chicago might look like if we discount future WAR by 20% each year.

Projected and Discounted WAR
Miller Projected WAR Discounted WAR Schwarber Projected WAR Discounted WAR
2016 1.0 1.0 2016
2017 1.5 1.2 2017 2.5 2.0
2018 1.0 0.6 2018 2.5 1.5
2019 2019 2.0 0.8
2020 2020 1.5 0.3
2021 2021 1.5 0.3
Total 2.8 4.6

With a 20% discount rate — which is entirely subjective, of course, so this more for illustration than a precise valuation — a +10 to +3.5 WAR gap in favor of Schwarber during their relative control years shrinks down to a +4.6 to +2.8 WAR gap. It’s still not enough to overcome the long-term value that Schwarber provides, but it’s at least an argument that it’s not insane for the Cubs to consider a deal involving those two, especially if the Yankees sweetened the pot.

Like, say, adding Aroldis Chapman to the deal. Putting Chapman and Miller in the Cubs bullpen, along with Hector Rondon and Pedro Strop, would give the Cubs the best bullpen in baseball, to go along with all the other things they’re the best at. And at that point, the short-term upgrade would be large enough that I think the Cubs would have to at least consider moving Schwarber.

I know the Cubs love his personality and his work ethic, and perhaps he will turn into the kind of franchise cornerstone that justifies keeping him for the future, even if he could bring back a serious upgrade to the team in the short-term. But given the questions I have about his offensive upside, in addition to the real questions about his defensive value, I think I’d at least be engaging the Yankees on a Schwarber-for-Miller-and-Chapman deal. Schwarber looks like a very nice young hitter, but the Cubs have other guys who also look like nice young hitters.

What they don’t have is a World Championship in the last century. Kyle Schwarber can’t help them with that this year. Andrew Miller and Aroldis Chapman could, and from my perspective, the short-term upgrade might be worth the long-term cost.





Dave is the Managing Editor of FanGraphs.

204 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
mattMember since 2023
10 years ago

Kyle Schwarber is very good and has elite offensive upside. He’s bad defensively in the OF but not in a Dye/Kemp/Bruce type of way and with more training will get better. He’s unlikely to ever be a top 20 position player but should be firmly in top 50 for years to come while being very affordable. No way would I trade him for Miller.

fredfotch
10 years ago
Reply to  Dave Cameron

Why such an aggressive response to a sensible opinion (whether or not you agree with it)?

August FagerstromMember since 2014
10 years ago
Reply to  fredfotch

Sensible opinions are typically backed by at least one piece of evidence

fredfotch
10 years ago

It seems like a pretty poor reaction from the author. If the comment didn’t address anything in the article, he should have just stood by the merits of the article. I wouldn’t expect a reasonable opinion to receive a snotty response from the author just because it’s not “backed up by at least one piece of evidence”.

He simply expressed his opinion that Schwarber has elite offensive upside and therefore he wouldn’t make the trade. Yes, he didn’t provide any “evidence” but it’s not like it was a particularly bold statement. Schwarber was picked 4th overall in 2014, ranked as the #19 overall prospect in 2015, and then went on to have a 131 wRC+ as a 22 year old in the MLB over half a season. Yes some of the numbers may not be sustainable, but that’s pretty impressive and he could even improve on those numbers.

If that’s not a profile of a guy with elite offensive upside then I don’t know what is.

Greg
10 years ago

Baseball Prospectus’ year-by-year WAR projections for Kyle Schwarber until he hits free agency:

2017: 4.3
2018: 4.6
2019: 4.4
2020: 4.4
2021: 4.0

Greg
10 years ago
Reply to  Greg

Dave’s created out of thin air personal projection:

2017: 2.5
2018: 2.5
2019: 2.0
2020: 1.5
2021: 1.5

Dave didnt use a formula, he simply projects Schwarber to be worth 1.5 WAR in his age 27 and age 28 seasons, well, because. Baseball Prospectus uses all available major and minor league statistics, not personal narratives and biases.

374285942768
10 years ago
Reply to  Greg

we should whole-heartedly believe that Schwarber, the 22 year old super prospect, has already peaked and is in his career decline. well, because.

374285942768
10 years ago
Reply to  374285942768

fuck he’s actually 23. nvm it’s over.

Fernando
10 years ago
Reply to  fredfotch

Because it’s not a sensible opinion if the person doesn’t even bother to respond to the content of the article. You can disagree with Dave, but simply ignoring his points is the equivalent of plugging your fingers in your ears and going “La, la, la, I”m not listening, la, la, la”.

Luy
10 years ago
Reply to  fredfotch

Did you mean to say conclusory instead of sensible? Or maybe unsubstantiated?
Communicating something calmly doesn’t make it true, well-argued or sensible.

Roger McDowell Hot Foot
10 years ago
Reply to  fredfotch

Where do you see the aggression there, exactly?

etweetz
10 years ago
Reply to  fredfotch

Maybe due to the complete speculation and lack of any data-based conclusions…

Dooduh
10 years ago
Reply to  etweetz

Opinions don’t need to be “backed by evidence.” People need to stop being so uptight. In most cases, these things have no “right answer.”

thestatbook
10 years ago
Reply to  Dooduh

Dooduh,

The question isn’t “what movie is the greatest of all time?” (It’s The Jerk, by the way), it’s, how good will Kyle Schwarber be?

The first question is completely immeasurable. That’s solely a matter of opinion (except for The Jerk, that’s a known fact).

The second is somewhat measurable based on statistical trends, history, body type, swing analysis, etc.

For the question on hand, there’s not a “right answer”, unless you can tell the future, but rather a “more likely answer”. And the one that offers statistical analysis is probably more likely than the one that doesn’t.

Johnston
10 years ago
Reply to  Dooduh

Not all opinions are equal. There’s a difference between an informed opinion and an uninformed one, between an expert opinion and an amateur opinion, and between a well-reasoned opinion and one off the top of someone’s head. I get paid very well to give expert testimony and offer expert opinions in my field for very good reasons.

Jason BMember since 2017
10 years ago
Reply to  Johnston

“I get paid very well to give expert testimony and offer expert opinions in my field for very good reasons.”

Perhaps, but I stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night. SO YOU WILL LISTEN TO EVERY DAMN WORD I HAVE TO SAY.

Johnston
10 years ago
Reply to  Jason B

No, because you’re still an idiot.

Not all opinions are equal. If you think they are, then you know nothing.

BlueinSF
10 years ago
Reply to  fredfotch

It’s because it was the first comment DC saw after spending a lot of time and effort spelling out good arguments backed up by fact and logical reasoning. So after all that work he posts it and the first guy says, “…but Schwarber is good!,” which was the exact armchair opinion Dave was trying to challenge.

I understand the snarkiness…

Mark Davidson
10 years ago
Reply to  fredfotch

Have we not all spent time with Dave in a chat or listened to him speak on a podcast? These writers are people, too, and therefore have personalaties. Dave Cameron’s happens to be a little snarky but I don’t think there’s any ill will behind it at all; he’s just Dave Cameron. There’s no need to get hurt over his comment, no matter how snarky.

BMac
10 years ago
Reply to  fredfotch

Maybe aggressive response but it was just funny.

jjgreen33
10 years ago
Reply to  Dave Cameron

I really don’t understand the hostility of this response. Are readers not allowed to have an opinion? Are they not permitted to disagree with you? I appreciate that it’s probably frustrating to get a pithy response to your piece, but he didn’t insult you or your work. He just disagreed.

ashlandateam
10 years ago
Reply to  jjgreen33

He didn’t actually interact or respond to the work itself. It’s so unrelated to what Dave wrote that it could have been copied and pasted from any other conversation about Schwarber. So yeah – given that was the very first comment, I’d say a sarcastic response is pretty well warranted. Heck, if nothing else, those may be the only words of the author that the reader in question will actually see, based on how little his comment interacted with the piece.

Bad Hermit
10 years ago
Reply to  ashlandateam

@ashlandateam You’re right that matt’s comment was generic, but it still was a comment about Schwarber on an article about Schwarber. That is more on-topic than several other comments in this thread (including my own about WS-weighting). Also, matt’s comment was more friendly than a couple critical comments below–no personal attack on Cameron or anything (unlike captain obvious, for example).
I know that most of Cameron’s defenders here are fans of his and this site, which is well-deserved, but one of the points of making objective arguments should be that you can refrain from baser forms of argumentation (sarcasm included).
The internet is an ugly place, so you certainly shouldn’t go around attacking those whom merely meekly disagree with you. It’s like entering a mosh pit then punching someone in the gut because their sleeve brushed up against you. (It shouldn’t matter how many annoying Cubs fans sleeves came before it….)
That being said, I think the best case against defending Cameron is that allowing the trolls to get to him inspires articles like the above. Which, whether you agree with his conclusion or not, is a good thing.

ashlandateam
10 years ago
Reply to  Bad Hermit

You know, you’re probably right about all that.

That said – looking from the perspective of someone who just did a ton of work to present an article for public consumption, it has to be frustrating for that work to be essentially ignored in the very first comment. If I was Dave, I’d be frustrated. And I didn’t think his response was all that hostile, but I also understand we all have a different threshold for that sort of thing. I can just see Dave hitting publish and within a minute, the first response is a guy arguing with points he didn’t even make because the guy couldn’t be bothered to read before he commented. That’s gotta be frustrating.

But still. You’re right.

Dooduh
10 years ago
Reply to  jjgreen33

No, generally you’re not allowed to have a contradictory response here… just so ya know.

johnforthegiants
10 years ago
Reply to  jjgreen33

And I also can’t understand the hostility of the readers to Matt’s response (90 minuses??). Even Dave suggested that the Yankees might have to sweeten the pot by adding Chapman and added that even that wouldn’t guarantee the Cubs accepting (‘I think the Cubs would have to at least consider moving Schwarber’). Is it that off-the-wall to say ‘no way’ to a one-on-one trade which even Dave admits might not be accepted even if Chapman is added? Is Miller so valuable that readers are offended by Matt saying he wouldn’t take him for Schwarber?

Stovokor
10 years ago

Agree. Guy responds to an article about Schwarber with a comment about Schwarber and gets lambasted by the author and downvoted to oblivion for no reason.

No evidence? It’s an internet comment, not a thesis requiring citations. Meanwhile, the downvoters conveniently ignore that the author just made up his own WAR projections based on nothing.

The commenter was nice, too, no personal attacks or anything.

reggiethomaslive
10 years ago
Reply to  jjgreen33

Let me recap.

1) Dave rebuts the common cubs fan view of Schwarber.

2) A cubs fan repeats the same silly viewpoint while ignoring everything Dave wrote.

3) Dave responds, gee I wish had had saved the effort.

4) You break down in tears over the “hostility” of Dave’s comment, and shake your fist at the universe.

Bad Hermit
10 years ago

@reggiethomaslive I indeed don’t think Dave’s comment was commensurate with the offense (it was probably just a final straw, understandable); however, I responded less to Dave’s comment and more to the defense of Dave’s comment.

I would rather comments such as captain obvious’s fallacious comment below attract more ire than matt’s innocuous comment above.

But I don’t think tears have been involved. Trust me, I personally won’t lose sleep over any of this–just an advocate for productive discourse.

KCDaveInLA
10 years ago
Reply to  Dave Cameron

Clearly what Kyle Schwarber lacks in a healthy HR/XBH rate he more than makes up with ability to inspire internet snippiness.

For what it’s worth, the Cubs can clearly go for it with their surplus of young hitters. If I were the Yanks, I would spend a little more time looking for a better deal.

Psychic... Powerless...
10 years ago
Reply to  Dave Cameron

Dave, I thought this article was incredibly fascinating and well thought out. Totally enjoyable. Don’t let internet rudeness get you down.

ashlandateam
10 years ago
Reply to  matt

Wait, so is this just your way of saying ‘I didn’t read the article’? Because you literally didn’t address even a single point put forward in the piece you’re commenting on.

Teej
10 years ago
Reply to  matt

I have a hard time assuming that a guy who was already mobility-challenged at 22, then ripped his knee in half, is going to turn into an even average corner outfielder. We’re talking about Schwarber in this story, of course, but that goes for almost any player. Guys who are being talked about as DHs at this age don’t just go and get way better defensively because they train harder. Rare is the MLB player whose defense gets better as he ages.

TheUncool
10 years ago
Reply to  Teej

Honestly, the other related issue not mentioned is Yankees stadium has a huge LF, so Schwarber’s lackluster D w/ surgically repaired knee in that LF will be exascerbated that much more. IF the Yanks do acquire him, I wonder if they wouldn’t try him in RF (w/ that short porch) instead. Since he’s been a catcher, presumably, his arm has a better shot of making him ok in that RF than in that LF.

I guess they could try him in RF at home and LF on the road w/ plenty of time spent at DH… but can he not play any 1B though? Bird isn’t guaranteed to return at 100% and playing as well as he looked last year afterall…

stanMember since 2019
10 years ago
Reply to  TheUncool

There’s really no chance the Yanks will play him in LF. He’s would be a 1B/C/RF. In that order.

TheUncool
10 years ago
Reply to  stan

Yeah… although his knee injury on top of already suspect D as catcher probably keeps him from catching at all going forward. The Yanks already have Gary Sanchez anyway… even though his D at catcher may still be suspect… but you can’t play everyone at 1B and DH afterall…

I would think they’d at least play him plenty as DH and try him out in RF at first until his knee proves 100% and his D improves while giving Bird his own comeback shot at 1B…

Momus
10 years ago
Reply to  Teej

This is something that gets ignored by fans a lot. Because there’s this belief that baseball players all peak at 27 (which is also wrong) they apply that to defense and expect that players will get better as they age. But the truth is that players almost universally just get worse at defense – and that means right away, from their first season on. Yes there are outliers as there always are, but overall if you’re projecting the future defense of a player always expect it to get worse.

Johnston
10 years ago
Reply to  Momus

I was just looking at Ozzie Smith’s defensive records the other day, and he peaked defensively at age 27 and then declined.

stanMember since 2019
10 years ago
Reply to  Teej

This situation differs because Schwarber has barely played LF in the majors and minors. However, I agree that there was little chance that he’d ever be even average in LF before he hurt his knee and that expectations should be lowered now.

rosen380
10 years ago
Reply to  Teej

FWIW–I Play-Index’ed players with >1500 PA as a DH from ages 23-27, where that accounted for at least 25% of their PA. You get Jim Rice and Albert Belle and Juan Gonzalez and David Ortiz. But you also get Delmon Young and Adam Lind and Dave Nilsson and Randy Bush

rustydudeMember since 2021
10 years ago
Reply to  matt

“He’s bad defensively in the OF but not in a Dye/Kemp/Bruce type of way”

Dude, were you watching the playoffs last year? He cost the Cubs a lot wandering around out in the OF. Nelson Cruz looked better than Schwarber the year he cost the Rangers a WS title. You, as a fan of the Cubs, do not want Schwarber playing LF.

Tryptamine
10 years ago
Reply to  rustydude

Surely this 4 game sample size is enough for us to know all about his defense.

rustydudeMember since 2021
10 years ago
Reply to  Tryptamine

The eye test (or scouting) often confirms what we’re seeing in the #’s. He had 300 innings of subpar defense in the regular season, as shown in defensive statistics.

CosmoMember since 2024
10 years ago
Reply to  rustydude

He looked bad in the playoffs, but did look better during the regular season. He made some really good plays as well. I’m not saying he’s good, or even average, but how he looked in the playoffs was not totally indicative of his abilities. He’s not a fat, slow guy. He does possess atheltic ability… if course he’s totally not a major league catcher.

kevinob 1908
10 years ago
Reply to  rustydude

I hate hearing people assess Schwarber’s defense based only on the playoffs. I know he didn’t look good in those last two games against the Mets. But if you watched him at all before that, you would know he wasn’t nearly that bad.

I would imagine most people reading this site know that just watching a few at-bats in the playoffs isn’t nearly a large enough sample to judge a hitter. I have no idea why we do it for a player’s defensive ability.

RonnieDobbs
10 years ago
Reply to  kevinob 1908

Have you ever seen a great outfielder look bad? Nor have I. Being a professional and embarrassing yourself really isn’t that easy to do in LF. I will take the eye test and a limited sample any day to evaluate an OF.

Dustin
10 years ago
Reply to  RonnieDobbs

I know you’re joking, and yet I still cannot help myself. Kevin Pillar flubbing: https://cdn.streamable.com/video/mp4/l27n_1.mp4

Jason BMember since 2017
10 years ago
Reply to  RonnieDobbs

“Have you ever seen a great outfielder look bad? Nor have I.”

It’s true! All great outfielders have 1.000 fielding percentages in perpetuity. LOOK IT UP.

soddingjunkmailMember since 2016
10 years ago
Reply to  matt

“He’s bad defensively in the OF but not in a Dye/Kemp/Bruce type of way and with more training will get better.”

What makes you say this?

He is currently not good, and is 235 pounds and now coming off a knee surgery. That doesn’t scream “likely to improve at defense” to me.

JoshuaMember since 2020
10 years ago

HIs UZR/150 in the OF last year was only -2. I know small sample size, but it isn’t obvious that he is terrible as of now. Also he never played much OF before last year, so that’s why you think he could have some room for improvement.

v2miccaMember since 2016
10 years ago
Reply to  matt

In what world does a player’s defense “get better with training” following a major knee injury?

OddBall Herrera
10 years ago

Something I think that doesn’t get brought up enough in the Schwarber talk is that we’re closing in on the DH being added to NL rosters. The only logic I can see behind Epstein’s insistence that Schwarber is untouchable is either (1) gamesmanship to build up his value or (2) he’s looking ahead to the day he has a DH spot to fill.

CC AFCMember since 2016
10 years ago

I believe Theo has clearly stated that Schwarber is not “untouchable.” I’m sure, like you suggest, there’s gamesmanship at play, anyway. http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/ct-cubs-theo-epstein-20160715-story.html

OddBall Herrera
10 years ago
Reply to  CC AFC

‘untouchable’ was definitely thrown around earlier in the season, but you’re right, he’s more recently said that’s not the case

CosmoMember since 2024
10 years ago

Theo is known to say “we’re not trading _____”, but I’ve never heard him say untouchable. I think when Theo says they’re not trading a guy, he means they’re not trading a guy *at that moment*… I think some fans take that as meaning they’re not trading a guy *ever*.

Curious Gorge
10 years ago

I was excited about the thought of my hometown team having a middle of the order that consisted of Rizzo, Bryant, Schwarber, and Soler… hoping it would be two righties and two lefties who would walk with tremendous power and overpowering other teams. I’d like to see them all healthy at the same time, but I do trust the management team to do the right thing. I can see what Soler and Schwarber are good at, but I’m not blind to their weaknesses (yes, I’m a Cubs fan with a realistic outlook). Defense matters.

stanMember since 2019
10 years ago
Reply to  Curious Gorge

There are Cub fans out there who are still hoping Soler will be worth something? He’s been below average with the bat for a good chunk of ML time now. Sure he could improve, but right now that’s more hope than legitimate expectation. He had a huge hot streak when he first came up and has been bad ever since. He’s also even worse than Schwarber with the glove, btw.

Curious Gorge
10 years ago
Reply to  stan

“I was”
“hoping”
“I’m not blind to their weaknesses”
“Defense matters”

Did you even read what I wrote??? Comprehension is a skill.

Psychic... Powerless...
10 years ago
Reply to  stan

Hoping Soler will be worth something? Hell yes. Putting money on it? No.

BritishCub
10 years ago

Nice article Dave…overran my lunch at work reading it….oops 🙂 I’ve never been super high on Scharwber as others but i have enjoyed him. I honestly feel the untradeable statements are just a smokescreen to keep a player who spends every home game in the dug out in good morale and not rocking the boat, but then again i could be (and often am) wrong. Given we’ve added a lefty with control i’d lean less towards making the deal ( as long as Montgomery plugs the gap) but honestly my lean is so slight i’d be happy either way.
I could definitely see us trading him if he maintained similar/worse numbers next year while showing he’s past his injury as then he’d be healthy and more valuable. Maybe they just want to avoid a sell low?

LHPSU
10 years ago

If I were the Yankees, I’d rather get somebody whose knees aren’t busted. Maybe somebody without Schwarber’s upside, but I’ve still got maybe 15 bidders.

Not to mention, if I were the Yankees, I’ve like 20 players ticketed for DH in the next couple of years and I need somebody who can play up the defensive spectrum.

ashlandateam
10 years ago
Reply to  LHPSU

Yeah, I actually think this makes little sense from the Yankees’ perspective. Schwarber seems like precisely the sort of player they SHOULDN’T be after.

besgueToDiffer
10 years ago
Reply to  LHPSU

After this year they will have A-Rod and McCann as the only aging sluggers left. McCann can likely handle catcher for at least another year or two and A-Rod may not be worth putting in the DH spot if he doesn’t show any improvement in the second half. A-Rod comes off the books after next year so there is room for a guy like that if they think his bat is worth it. Worst case scenario, he’s young enough to fake it in left 4 times a week.

Momus
10 years ago
Reply to  LHPSU

I agree with that too. I don’t see Schwaber as a particularly good fit for the Yankees – maybe they’re thinking to flip him next year? Even the young high upside guys the Yankees have in the minors are low defensive value 1B/DH/corner OF types. I mean if we imagine all the close to the majors guys working out then the Yankees have Schwaber, Bird and 12 foot tall Aaron Judge possible taking DH, 1B and RF – that’s basically zero defensive value.

But hey, value is value and if Schwaber hits he adds value and youth to a team that desperately needs it.

kerrywoodwins20
10 years ago
Reply to  LHPSU

I’m confused by everyone worried about Schwarber’s knees. Schwarber isn’t in the NBA, is he? Are we talking about Derrick Rose’s career here, because we Chicagoans know plenty about that. A 23 year old baseball player should have a 100% full recovery from an injury such as this.

LHPSU
10 years ago

For the same reason that pitchers rehabbing from Tommy John surgery don’t get traded.

ashlandateam
10 years ago

This seems simple enough to me: the Cubs want to win the World Series this season. Schwarber doesn’t help you do that – Chapman and Miller do. This is the best Cubs team in more than a generation – better than 2003, better than 1989 or 1984. And that’s without Schwarber.

If you win the Series with Chapman and Miller, quite frankly, I don’t think a rational Cubs fan can complain even if Schwarber turns into Mike Trout. But if he is, indeed, Mike Napoli, with the depth in their system and their financial resources, that’s a loss you can live with even if you don’t win a ring this year. The reward outweighs the risk, and there are no guarantees that 2017 and beyond are as good as 2016. If that deal is on the table, I don’t think the Cubs can turn it down.

Mahoney
10 years ago
Reply to  ashlandateam

This.

Even if it’s just for Miller straight up, you’d be getting an insanely good reliever who EXACTLY fills the Cubs’ greatest need right now, and over the next two years where they would have control of Miller (at just $9m per year). Even though I like Schwarber a lot, if I were the Cubs I’d do the deal in a heartbeat.

Rational FanMember since 2025
10 years ago
Reply to  ashlandateam

Dave definitely didn’t steal my comp, I want to emphasize that before people accuse me of inferring such, but during Cameron’s chat back in June I drew the same comp. Schwarber has always been the left handed Napoli to me. Cub fans take that as an insult, but it’s really not one.

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/dave-cameron-fangraphs-chat-62916/

“Rational Fan21 days 22 hours ago
I actually don’t understand the Schwarber love; he’s a plus bat no doubt, but his best bat comp to me is Mike Napoli – a very good, but not great bat. His K rate probably prevents him from hitting for a high average throughout his career. He has really big power, but his FB rate sits right at Napoli’s career rate (40ish%). Obviously he is young, but he’s probably pretty close to a developed product offensively.

In response to the absurdity of his LF defense comment in this chat; come on. The reason Schwarber got hurt is because he’s not a good OF’er because he’s never played out there. Any outfielder knows to break off from that ball that deep into the left center gap understanding that his CF’er has to be there if his slow footed self is there. After the surgery he’s going to be even slower. He’s a decent athlete, but expecting anything better than below average OF defense seems like a reach. If I were the Cubs, I would be looking to sell.”

Dave certainly sold it and summed it up much better than I, but I agree with every point made in this article. I almost feel, at this point, the Cubs are the ones putting out all this Schwarber hype because other teams can’t be this naive.

CosmoMember since 2024
10 years ago
Reply to  Rational Fan

I’m not speaking for any other Cubs fan but me. The only thing that bugs me is when after 300 AB, people act like the book is already written on him. He started out hot last year and carried the team when Bryant was slumping… the league caught up to him then he fell into his own slump. He made some adjustments and hit well in the playoffs. He hasn’t even had a chance yet to show if those adjustments were real or just a hot streak. Look at Bryant. There were a bunch of questions about him coming into the year, but he has shown improvements. You bring up Napoli, I thought the worse case scenario on Schwarber was a guy like Matt Stairs, and best case is a guy with on base skills and huge power. I know he’s not a good fielder. I know he’ll never be average, but I want so see him prove one way or the other what type of hitter he is before I give up on him. If he is a good fielder, they can afford to play one bad fielder.

Rational FanMember since 2025
10 years ago
Reply to  Cosmo

No one is giving up on him though; at least not in my opinion. It’s simply that Schwarber’s swing profile has limitations to it. He swings and misses a lot within the zone because he has a big and powerful swing; similarly to the other guys comped. Springer may end up hitting for average, but he also has great speed, hits a lot more grounders, and distributes the ball much more effectively.

Schwarber pulls the ball when he hits it on the ground, greatly limiting his batting average potential. It’s really, really, really hard to swing and miss as frequently as he does, while being a pull hitter, and hit for average. I also don’t think he should make an adjustment because he will be limiting his biggest strength by doing so; his power.

The problem with projecting a lot of further development is that he has a good understanding of the strike zone already for a young hitter, and his swing limits him a bit. It’s big, powerful, but not exactly extremely quick to the ball.

I actually don’t think Napoli is an insult; I never have. Napoli was a very good MLB hitter, still is, and his peak was quite impressive. He’s not someone I would refuse to trade or build my organization around, and I don’t think the Cubs should think such. He has no position, he’s never going to be an elite contact hitter…. etc. And btw, Napoli has a career WAR of 27.1. He had a peak season of 5.4 WAR. He has a 124 WRC for his career. Napoli is a really good player. He just has limitations, as does Schwarber.

CosmoMember since 2024
10 years ago
Reply to  Rational Fan

I don’t think anything you said is wrong. I don’t think Napoli is an insult either. My point is that I’m seeing a lot of black and white opinions on him… I want to see him play a full season before I really try to figure out who he is. We all know his limitations, but when all the young guys are fully developed, he’ll probably be the 4th or 5th best position player on the team.

johnforthegiants
10 years ago
Reply to  Cosmo

cornflake, you seem like a reasonable Cubs fan (and these are in really short supply here), can you explain the 90 thumbs down to Matt’s post at the beginning? I’m sincerely mystified. I assume these are Cubs fans who were enraged, but I can’t understand why.

Psychic... Powerless...
10 years ago

IMO, it was Matt’s tone, which I found arrogant and dismissive. But that’s just my reaction.

CosmoMember since 2024
10 years ago

John, I don’t think it’s Cubs fans down voting Matt’s post… his post seemed pretty Pro-Cubs to me. I think it’s Dave’s fans who are doing the down voting.

stanMember since 2019
10 years ago
Reply to  ashlandateam

“just” 9M per year? That’s an awful lot for a reliever, even one as good as Miller. Just two years ago the Yankees seemed crazy for giving him that much.

Matt
10 years ago
Reply to  stan

But has already been worth that if you go by this site’s ~8M per WAR.

Matt
10 years ago
Reply to  ashlandateam

Yep. I love prospects as much as the next guy, but I think people forget, flags fly forever. And if you are a cubs fan I feel like those flags have higher value than a typical franchise.

BMac
10 years ago
Reply to  ashlandateam

Even if you do the trade, the WS championship is hardly a lock. And the Yankees never offered Chapman & Miller to my knowledge.

javybaezMember since 2025
10 years ago

With a 7 game lead 95 games into the season, couldn’t you argue that the Cubs have very little need to add Miller’s projected 1 ROS WAR? Adding Miller bumps our division title odds from 93.3% to what…95%? Chapman gets us to 96%? Obviously playoffs are a crapshoot, as long as you avoid the wild card game.

After this year, Schwarber obviously holds more value, so I don’t see the point.

ashlandateam
10 years ago
Reply to  javybaez

Are the playoffs really that much of a crapshoot, though? We’ve seen that the teams that typically have won in recent history have a dominant rotation or bullpen. This deal would give the Cubs both. I don’t think that the playoffs are random enough to give any team a coin flip’s chance against a pitching staff of Arrieta/Lester/Rondon/Montgomery/Miller/Chapman. That’s essentially an All-Star pitching staff.

I suppose anything can happen in a short series, but that would be as stacked as any team has ever had in the bullpen, with two aces on top of it. That’s essentially the Royals pen with a Giants rotation.

javybaezMember since 2025
10 years ago
Reply to  ashlandateam

I think that’s a recency bias more than anything else. A quick google search isn’t showing anything, but I know I’ve read studies that have shown that pitching doesn’t have an inherent advantage over offense when it comes down to winning a short series.

Edit: To add some quick stats, per fWAR,

Royals had the fifth best offense (including defense, but still), 15th best pitching staff in 2015 (22nd for starters, 5th for bullpen)

Giants had the 6th best offense, 26th best pitching (23rd starters, 24th bullpen) in 2014

besgueToDiffer
10 years ago
Reply to  javybaez

I don’t think he’s trying to say pitching has an inherent advantage over an offense. I think he’s just saying that with the built in off days acquiring dominant relievers would improve your chances of winning a short series.

javybaezMember since 2025
10 years ago
Reply to  besgueToDiffer

Maybe. The Giants bullpen in 2014 was garbage and it worked out fine for them. I doubt Arrieta can pull a Bumgarner, but there’s more than one way to go about it.

Regardless, Cameron’s main way of reducing the team control aspect was talking about the value of current wins and discounting future wins. We don’t need Chapman and/or Miller to win the division.

ashlandateam
10 years ago
Reply to  javybaez

My point was that the Cubs, as constructed, can’t be thinking about winning the division. They already are near or are at the top of every category in the league; winning the division when you’re this good isn’t enough.

I don’t think it’s a stretch for the Cubs to be thinking about game 4 of the NLDS or game 3 of the NLCS right now. And the ‘two dominant starters’ or ‘four dominant relievers’ template has worked in recent history with league average-ish teams in other areas. Giving the best team in the league BOTH seems too enticing to turn down. Mainly, because I don’t think the playoffs are as much a crapshoot as we think. Random things happen, yes – but you can give yourself the best hand to work with if you’re elite everywhere. And the Cubs would be with this trade.

Frankly, I’m not a Cubs fan and I wouldn’t personally like the deal if it was made. But if I WAS a Cubs fan, I’d be all over this.

javybaezMember since 2025
10 years ago
Reply to  ashlandateam

Giving up 5 years of team control on a (and this is probably pessimistic) 3 WAR corner outfielder to think about a few innings this year is way too shortsighted. In game 4 of the NLDS we might be up 6 runs by the late innings, or down 4 runs, or we might have already swept them, or already gotten swept.

I mean, Montgomery has a .241 wOBA against vs lefties this year, Miller has a .223. Are you really giving up someone like Schwarber for that upgrade?

Theo/Hoyer/McLeod’s goal was/is to build a team that made the playoffs as often as possible. If you assume making the playoffs is a lock this year, which I do, 5 years of Schwarber is clearly more valuable than 2 years of Miller.

ashlandateam
10 years ago
Reply to  javybaez

In a vacuum, sure – 5 years of Schwarber is more valuable than 2 years of Miller.

But the Cubs clearly have more depth offensively than in the pen. And Miller isn’t a LOOGY; he’s a guy who’s one of he top 6 or 8 relievers in the game, regardless of handedness. So the question isn’t just ‘5 years of Schwarber vs 2 years of Miller’; it’s ‘what’s the best thing for this Cubs team at this point in time?

I don’t have exact numbers, but it appears that the Cubs have somewhere around 343 good young hitters in their system. Dealing Schwarber for Miller (and, in this exercise, Chapman) is dealing from a position of depth for an area that’s thin. Add in the knee injury and the questionable plate approach (that the article outlines) and I don’t think that it’s clear that for this Cubs team at this point in time that 5 years of Schwarber is nearly as valuable as Miller.

TheUncool
10 years ago
Reply to  javybaez

That would be true if Schwarber’s knee isn’t a significant added risk *and* they’re actually able to play all their positional talent.

IF they don’t deal any of their young positional talent, they won’t be able to make full use of them.

johnforthegiants
10 years ago
Reply to  javybaez

Actually the 2014 giants bullpen had the 5th best era in the majors, i’m not sure it’s really accurate to say it was ‘garbage’.

tokenpadre
10 years ago
Reply to  javybaez

Yes, the playoffs are a crapshoot but that doesn’t mean that each team (post-wild card game) has a precisely 1/8 chance of winning. Replacing roughly 3-15 postseason innings of Wood/Grimm/Montgomery with Miller probably moves the needle a bit. Quantifying that improvement is difficult since Chicago could play anywhere from 3-19 postseason games.

Bad Hermit
10 years ago

“For an organization like the Cubs, with a real chance to win the World Series for the first time in 108 years, I think you have to put a pretty significant discount on future wins.”

Is the act of not winning the World Series more costly for a team currently in a drought? Is the act of winning the World Series more beneficial for a team currently in a drought? And in what ways? Short-term cash-flow, future cash-flow?

Because at least for this year I saw some talent gains (and money saving) for the Cubs that cannot have been hurt by the desire of players to end the drought. And in the past there appeared to have been attendance and revenue increases per winning increases at levels higher than for non-drought teams.

These are only observations–not statistics–and you did claim it was “more art than science,” but I am intrigued that there is more nuance to the situation than first meets the eye.

Eric Weinstein
10 years ago

Dave, Love your work and thanks for the Schwarber article. There are two assumptions in here that I take a little issue with:
(1) that Schwarber’s high HR/XBH ratio is likely to correct with a lower HR rate – by substituting HRs for doubles. I’m not sure I buy that. Why couldn’t it be that his HR/XBH rate corrects by having singles substituted for doubles? I agree that 6 doubles compared to 21HR was an odd and probably unsustainable ratio. But as a minor leaguer Schwarber had 39 doubles and triples compared to 34 HR. Schwarber might not look like a speedster, but he’s not slow like Giambi or Thome. And I recall last year Schwarber hitting a number of hard struck balls that I was surprised only ended up being singles, and it may be that either he or Brandon Hyde were overly conservative about sending him. I think going forward it would be fair to expect more doubles, regardless of what happens to his home runs.
(2) The 25 or under list. Schwarber wasn’t just 25 or under last year. He put up big numbers at the MLB level as a 22 year old, just one year after he was playing in the Big Ten. I get that Schwarber isn’t a 6’3 190 lb guy with remaining physical projection, and has more old-man skills than the a well-rounded skills player. But I don’t think you’re giving him enough credit for precociousness. He may not have any physical projection left, but it doesn’t seem far-fetched at all to think that he could still improve as a hitter with more familiarity to the big league level.

Travis LMember since 2016
10 years ago
Reply to  Eric Weinstein

If you were to cluster the characteristics of BIP that become 1b, 2b, 3b, HR, you’re going to find that 2b and 3b are mostly the same, overlap a lot with HR, and are furthest from the XHB cluster.

In other words, singles don’t look like the other hits. It just doesn’t make sense to turn a single into a double because the characteristics [velocity, angle, spin, etc.] for an XBH and a 1B are more wider than 2b to HR.

Eric Weinstein
10 years ago
Reply to  Travis L

fair enough – but we’re talking about an outlier ratio and some pretty small sample sizes (that also happen to mark a pretty big departure from his prior performance). It would only have taken a few singles legged out for doubles to put the ratio into a more normal range.

TheUncool
10 years ago
Reply to  Eric Weinstein

Maybe it’ll end up a little of both… although he might end up effectively slower w/ his surgically repaired knee… perhaps at least in his 1st year or two returning, no?

Maybe I missed something, but seems like people, including Dave in the article, have downplayed the risk of his knee injury (even if Dave may have also underappreciated Schwarber’s pre-injury talent)…

Eric Weinstein
10 years ago
Reply to  Eric Weinstein

One other thing on the Mike Napoli comp: At the age of 22, Mike Napoli put up only slightly better numbers in A-ball than Schwarber did at the MLB level (post-season included) as a 22 year old.

Rational FanMember since 2025
10 years ago
Reply to  Eric Weinstein

Yes, but development comes at different ages. Not only that, but Napoli was a high school player. He also spent all of his time in the minors developing as a catcher as well. Schwarber caught about half his minor league games but the expectation wasn’t to develop him to be an everyday catcher as was Napoli’s. Developing a catcher takes a lot of time away from developing him as a hitter.

The expectation that there’s a lot of room for improvement, for Schwarber whose swing doesn’t profile to change much, just doens’t seem genuine. He’s already got a good understanding of the strike zone, he just misses pitches in the zone. His swing plane has a lot to do with that, as does his selling out for power. With his pull tendencies, while being left handed, he’d be a fool to change his approach to appease more contact too. It leads me to believe that he’s close to a finished product offensively.

JonKneeV
10 years ago
Reply to  Eric Weinstein

Agreed. If some of his evidence is that he had some “lucky” HRs due to exit velocity and where they landed, sure. He’s making hard contact and the ball is going out at above the norm. That doesn’t mean it has to greatly regress towards the norm.

Not only that, if you’re trying to convince me that this trade gives the Cubs the best chance to win the WS, I disagree. I believe the best way to win a WS is to consistently make the playoffs to give yourself multiple chances. Red Sox, Cardinals, Royals, Giants.

Keeping Schwarber (I believe) gives you more chances to make the playoffs than Andrew Miller does.

TheUncool
10 years ago
Reply to  JonKneeV

The Royals won w/ a great bullpen (and great D, but largely underwhelming offense) in just 3 tries so far (and actually went 2x). Their example is actually contrary to your point.

Meanwhile, you neglected how infrequently the Braves won it all despite their historic run or the many other teams that make the playoffs and not win it all.

IF you look at the actual WS winners, most of them had solid-to-great bullpens at least since the modern use of bullpens began. The Bosox teams that won had pretty good bullpens as did the Cardinals.

You’re right that you generally need to be good all-around, and it’s best to be very good for a long time so you have many opps at it. But to actually win it all and not become a perennial also-ran, you do need to do more than just that. And if/when you can do more, why not?

As it is, the Cubs can’t actually play all their surplus of positional talent anyway — assuming one can still consider Schwarber and his surgically repaired knee a positional talent. IF they don’t deal to improve their weakness, there’s opp cost involved in that…

Asmo
10 years ago
Reply to  Eric Weinstein

He also spends 4 paragraphs talking about BABIP based on a flawed premise. Sure, a good part of Bryant’s success last year was based on BABIP, but he’s been better this year despite a 50 point drop in BABIP. But more importantly, what does any of that have to do with Schwarber? He was great last year despite an average BABIP, and Cameron even concludes that there’s no reason to expect Schwarber’s BABIP to drop. So why even bring it up? I don’t even necessarily disagree with his overall argument, but this point seems unnecessary.

Momus
10 years ago
Reply to  Asmo

There are several signs that point to impending regression in his numbers and it is unlikely that he will see an increase in BABiP to counter that. That’s why BABiP is mentioned.

johnforthegiants
10 years ago
Reply to  Momus

Bryant made up for the regression in babip by cutting his ks a lot. Could happen.

Asmo
10 years ago
Reply to  Momus

But the main area Cameron expects him to regress (HR/XBH) would directly lead to an increase in BABIP. Turning 6 of his HR into doubles increases his BABIP from .293 to .314. His SLG drops a bit, but if he improves his Z-Contact% even a few points, he’ll pick up enough extra hits to at least partially cancel that out.

Richie
10 years ago

Given the randomness of the post-season and the Cubs’ excellent 5-year outlook, I’d give them the lowest ‘Future WAR Discount Rate’ in baseball, myself. Not a high one.

HomerAtTheBatMember since 2024
10 years ago

While I agree Schwarber will never be an asset defensively, its worth noting that the cubs thought his catching was strong enough that he was going to catch most if not all of Hammel’s games. If he can catch once a week, I think that raises his ceiling as a player somewhat. I think I agree that hes not a 4+ WAR player, but there is an outside shot of him being a Chris Davis-type bat that can double as a backup catcher. In the end I agree Chapman and Miller would be a fair deal for Schwarber given how awesome the cubs bullpen would be which i think has a lot of additional value in the playoffs when bullpens can be relied on a bit more heavily.

Rational FanMember since 2025
10 years ago
Reply to  HomerAtTheBat

No chance he catches after the knee injury. He already lacked lateral movement pre-injury, and it will only be worse now. He’s also never been considered a good receiver. He has a decent arm, but that’s his only + quality behind the plate.

TheUncool
10 years ago
Reply to  Rational Fan

Because of that, I would think the Yanks would try him in RF at least at home, if they actually acquired him. Can’t imagine playing him in that spacious LF in the Bronx. Maybe he’ll also make good insurance at 1B if Bird doesn’t come back at 100% *and* hitting as hoped…

Momus
10 years ago
Reply to  HomerAtTheBat

They had to try having Schwaber catch given how insanely valuable he would be if he became even a mediocre defensive catcher, but I don’t think even the Cubs ever thought there was much chance of him making it as a major league catcher – certainly no one else in the industry did.

Sonny Price
10 years ago

Schwarber could end up a platoon player down the road. Losing this year really stinks because he’ll enter 2017 and the team he plays for will have no idea if he can actually hit lefties.

Richie
10 years ago

Wrigley Field might be the 2nd-best MLB park (after Fenway) in which to hide a plodder in left field. Then if the NL does add the DH soon? If Schwarber is a super hard worker now keeping a good attitude after a real tough break, myself, I really like betting on those guys going forward.

gottaIch116Member since 2020
10 years ago

Great article. Dave clearly touched on this but one thing that I’ve been thinking a lot about lately is that: Is this the best the Cubs are going to play over the next several years?

Guys like Baez and Russel, although they’ve been playing well, might not get much better. The prospects called up this year seem to be playing out of their minds. Arrieta might leave. Guys like Lester will start declining etc…

Throw in the question marks about Schwarber that Dave talks about. I hope the cubs go for Chapman and Miller. That would be a ridiculously good team in the playoffs.

Mike ZMember since 2025
10 years ago

Agree that 22 yr old Schwarbs wasn’t getting a fair comparison to 25 yr olds that had extra yrs for development and still had contact issues. Where these results skewed with poor performance against LH? As a Cub fan would like to think that his contact would improve similar to Bryant and Russell and his performance against LH improve similar to Rizzo.

Dave – having seen Montgomery this year does that trade for Miller make sense? Would the Yankees be gun shy after their last trade with the Cubs?

captain obvious
10 years ago

“I guess I should have nominated Cano in the most overrated prospect thread the other day. That he still gets talked up as some kind of top prospect (not pointing at John here, by the way) amazes me.

I’ve seen Cano play a lot, and I’m not even sure he’d be a productive Triple-A player. Let’s start with his defense; it’s brutal. He has terrible footwork and simply lacks any kind of instincts around the bag. There’s no way you want him playing up the middle. He might have the raw speed to not be awful in left field, but that’s about as kind as I can be regarding his glovework. Offensively, he’s a fastball hitter. He sits dead red on every pitch and waits for a mistake. Any good breaking ball or offspeed pitch will have him out in front. He’s mostly a gap hitter, lacking the power to drive the ball consistently over the wall. To add insult to injury, he’s also a terrible baserunner.

In his prime, I think he could hit .280/.320/.400 while playing awful defense. Yipee.”

-David Cameron, February 20, 2005

Bad Hermit
10 years ago

Even if Cameron was wrong about every player he’s ever wrote on in the past, that still wouldn’t disqualify him from being correct about Schwarber. An article should always be judged by its content not its author.

free-range turducken
10 years ago

I got a bunch of cherries in my backyard that need picking, you seem like the perfect guy for that.

Luy
10 years ago

11 year-old cherries are my favorite

dmgetz
10 years ago

So…the fact Dave missed on a guy 11.5 years ago invalidates everything he wrote above?

Momus
10 years ago

For context could you please post everything Cameron said about every other prospect in 2005? Just so we’re not cherry picking one opinion from 11 years ago.

thestatbook
10 years ago

I don’t know if I should be impressed that you remember something you read 11 years ago or slightly concerned that you held on to this for this long?

Jason BMember since 2017
10 years ago

“given the Cubs well-known interest in Andrew Miller, there appears to be mutual interest in players from both sides, with a stand-off emerging over whether the Cubs should surrender Schwarber in a deal for the game’s best left-handed reliever.”

Did Aroldis Chapman die? I feel like there should be a story about this.

Tct
10 years ago

Shouldn’t we at least acknowledge that WAR might not be the best way to evaluate a relief pitcher who is getting traded to a team that’s going have him pitching high leverage innings in games that may make or break their championship aspirations. Davis, Herrera, Holland, and Madson combined for a little over 4 wins last year. Are you telling me that the Royals would only have been 4 games worse if those guys were replaced with replacement level pitchers? And how can you calculate the impact those guys had on the postseason where relievers seem to be leveraged better and the best ones used more often?

Jason BMember since 2017
10 years ago

“But also note that, of the 20 hitters on that list, there’s exactly one guy who might be considered a great hitter: Kris Bryant. Davis and Upton have had a couple of great seasons at the plate, but overall, they’ve been more good hitters than great hitters.”

I agree with your premise – that Schwarber shouldn’t be valued as highly as a lot of Cubs fans would like to believe – but the above statement seems a little disingenuous. There are plenty of busts on that list, but I think most anyone would be perfectly thrilled if Schwarber developed into a Justin Upton at the plate, or Chris Davis, or George Springer. If you’re setting the bar at Kris Bryant – a great hitter, potentially a generational talent – that’s a mighty tall bar for anyone to clear.

Momus
10 years ago
Reply to  Jason B

“I think most anyone would be perfectly thrilled if Schwarber developed into a Justin Upton at the plate, or Chris Davis”

…I bet they wouldn’t. Most people (fans) weren’t happy about how either of those guys developed.

Jason BMember since 2017
10 years ago
Reply to  Momus

Welp. If you’re not happy with a guy who averaged 3.8 WAR over a 7-year period, or a guy who has averaged 3.9 WAR per season over the last 4.5 years, I dunno what to tell you, besides “you may have unreasonable expectations for your prospects.”

robhuff
10 years ago

I get that Schwarber isn’t perfect (no ballplayer is) and that his power output is likely to regress in the future given his HR/FB rate. I promise, I get that.

I was surprised, however, that this article did not mention Schwarber’s ability to improve moving forward. After all, we’re talking about a player whose top two offensvie comps (according to PECOTA) are 2013 Anthony Rizzo and 2009 Evan Longoria, two players players in the early stages of multi-year runs atop the MVP voting lists (at least, here’s hoping with Rizzo).

It’s not as if 2015 Kyle Schwarber was the best possible version of him. It was the 22-yo rookie version of him. Even with regression almost certain, there are other areas for improvement available, too. For instance, Rizzo has chopped his K% noticeably over the last few years and it has enabled his OBP to shoot up even as his BABIP is limited, as evidenced in this article. Schwarber worked K% in the high teens in the minors, then shot up to the high twenties as a rookie. If he cuts his K% down to split the difference in the low twenties, he should be able to grow his BA even as his ISO drops. That all factors in.

I realize that you probably needed 10,000+ words to say everything you’d like to say, Dave. On the whole, this is a good piece that’s worth writing at this time of year.

For what it’s worth, if the Yanks keep Chapman but send us Jorge Mateo and one of James Kaprielian or Domingo Acevedo along with Miller, I’m listening. But they’re probably not at that point.

TheUncool
10 years ago
Reply to  robhuff

I imagine if the Cubs do deal Schwarber in this manner, it will at least be partially because of the added risk of his surgically repaired knee holding him back going forward — they would probably know that risk better than all us outsiders. And certainly, if I were Yankees management, I would be concerned about that as well, especially if we’re hoping to play him in that spacious LF in the Bronx…

Joey Butts
10 years ago
Reply to  robhuff

That’s an interesting trade idea, but the Yankees aren’t giving up enough. In order to even things out, they’re going to have to include A-Rod and Jacoby Ellsbury.

Clutch Narrative
10 years ago

Just what do you think you’re doing, Dave? Dave, I really think I’m entitled to an answer to that question. I know everything hasn’t been quite right with me, but I can assure you now, very confidently, that it’s going to be all right again.

BassmanUW826
10 years ago

I don’t disagree with your premise, Dave. But if the Yankees really do have Schwarber as the guy they want, the only real risk the Cubs run in not making a deal now considering their 7 game NL Central lead is that someone else offers a meaningfully better deal so the Yankees won’t give the Cubs a last chance to offer Schwarber. Or perhaps the Yankees win 6 of their next 7 and are so in the wild card race they decide to keep both. But except for those pretty unlikely circumstances (the Yankees are losing 4-1 to the Orioles as I write this), the Cubs will likely get a chance to offer Schwarber before the Yankees accept another offer, or the Yankees may determine they aren’t getting what they want from anyone and the Cubs might be able to obtain Miller or Chapman for a more reasonable package.

Beyond this, though, I think the Cubs will need to be looking at moving at least 1 of Schwarber and Soler at end of year anyways, and potentially both. Baez has shown himself to be too freaking good defensively at 3B to not give him a shot to be an every day player there sometime soon, even with all of this offensive value coming against LHPs.

TheUncool
10 years ago
Reply to  BassmanUW826

While they might be willing to deal Chapman for less, can’t see them dealing Miller for less though. Even w/ Chapman, they can always offer him the QO and either keep him next year or get a comp pick… unless I’m mistaken. They aren’t suddenly small market and averse to doing that afterall…

BassmanUW826
10 years ago
Reply to  TheUncool

I don’t disagree. The Yankees can very well just choose to hang on to Miller, considering their payroll, his contract, and how freaking good he is. I’m more saying there’s no reason for the Cubs to give them Schwarber in return for Miller until it’s actually 100% clear that the Yankees won’t take anything else, which could be at about 3:55 Eastern Time on July 31 if no other team is willing to pay the Yankees’ price either.

rnallappa
10 years ago

This might have been the best piece I’ve read here. One question I had, though, was that when you assumed 60% was the practical limit for turning XBH into HR, and you gave Schwarber a 55% HR/XBH rate, you chose to stay with the same number of total XBH. But couldn’t you also keep HR fixed and increase the total number of XBH, therefore increasing his slugging instead of decreasing? This would be possible if you believed that he was hitting hard hit, potential XBH balls right at outfielders and was getting unlucky.

Mahoney
10 years ago

Did I miss something, or are the Cubs seriously looking to Joe Nathan for bullpen depth down the stretch?

If they’re serious about that, I don’t see how they could bluff the Yankees with a straight face that Miller and/or Chapman aren’t worth a heavy price. Rondon’s been strong but the rest of the Cubs pen has struggled.

CosmoMember since 2024
10 years ago
Reply to  Mahoney

In my opinion, I think they’re throwing shit at a wall and seeing if it sticks. I dont get the feeling theyre counting on him.

rnallappa
10 years ago

Also, one more comment: Contrary to what’s stated in your article, Anthony Rizzo appears to have little better than league average exit velocity according to baseballsavant (90.5 mph vs league average 89.3 mph), while Bryant hits it at 90.8 mph. Schwarber, meanwhile, averaged 93.1 mph last season, and an increase of 2.6 mph should correspond to a 22.5 point increase in xBABIP relative to Rizzo, according to http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/a-baseballs-exit-velocity-is-five-parts-hitter-one-part-pitcher/.

Further, Schwarber’s speed is (surprisingly) better than Bryant’s and much better than Rizzo’s. Zips projects Schwarber to post a SPD of 4.9, which is 1.7 better than Rizzo. Using Chamberlain’s xBABIP formula, this 1.7 corresponds to an additional 7 points of BABIP.

So totaling these two, we should expect Schwarber’s BABIP to be roughly 30 points higher than Rizzo’s, all else equal (which is a big if, as batted ball profile alone could be significant, but I don’t have time to explore that right now). With Rizzo at a .296 BABIP, that would mean Schwarber could have a BABIP in the ballpark of .325.

scotman144Member since 2016
10 years ago

I enjoyed this article and agree with the premise that Schwarber may be overrated on the back of his unsustainable HR barrage.

One quibble: you strongly emphasize that an enormous difference between Bryant and Schwarber is that Bryant is a RHB and Schwarber is a LHB who should be much more prone to the shift.

However you then go on to comp. Schwarber to Mike Napoli, a RHB.

Any particular reason you went with Napoli there over someone like Brandon Moss?

TheUncool
10 years ago
Reply to  scotman144

Seems like he made that comp at least in part because Napoli was also a catcher who wasn’t even tried in the OF. Plus Napoli has had greater success than Moss, who only partially bloomed rather late and has never found enough consistency to even have 1 good, complete season in MLB as a regular yet. Yeah, I suppose Schwarber could turn into Moss on the low end of plausible outcomes, but Schwarber hasn’t followed a career path remotely like Moss’s thus far though…

scotman144Member since 2016
10 years ago
Reply to  TheUncool

Brandon Moss 2013: 145 games played, 30 HR, .369 wOBA, 2.3 WAR
Brandon Moss 2014: 147 games played, 24 HR, .339 wOBA, 2.1 WAR

Yes, he had a down year in 2015 at 0.6 WAR but still played in 145 games.

He was a regular the entire 2nd half of 2012 putting up 2.5 WAR and has already gotten into 75 games this year pacing for ~130gp and ~2 WAR.

Is a power hitting swing and miss LHB who puts up wRC+ figures in the 120-140 range in his prime really such a light/low-end comp?

I am saying that the skills Schwarber has shown so far folded in with a regressed HR rate looks a lot like (the good version of) Brandon Moss. The good news about that is Schwarber is young enough to conceivably improve from that talent level.

As for Napoli having greater career success than Moss: He certainly has and can’t one imagine that a big difference is their handedness/shiftability given their very similar skill sets? And that all loops back around to Napoli being a weird comp to throw out in an article where you explicitly stated a RHB with this profile is not directly comparable to a LHB with this profile.

AFMember since 2022
10 years ago

Awesome article demonstrating that Schwarber is overvalued . . . only to conclude at the end that Schwarber is still worth Miller AND Chapman. I don’t think the Yankees would do that deal. I think what is missing here is that (1) deadline deals can’t be analyzed with a straightline discount rate because teams are willing to pay a substantial premium (probably close to 100%) for immediate production, and (2) recently elite relievers (Giles, Kimbrel) have more trade value than their WAR projections indicate. Not to mention the realistic chance that Miller ends up netting a 1st round pick at the end of his contract. Miller is incredibly valuable in his own right. I don’t see the Yankees adding Chapman to get Schwarber.

AFMember since 2022
10 years ago
Reply to  AF

I should mention that you always have to take a discount when you trade someone who is injured, especially someone who is seriously injured and out for the season. If Schwarber were healthy and having an above average year at the plate, then sure, Miller and Chapman — or even far more than that if he were healthy and hitting like last year. But he’s out for the season. That has to affect trade value.

Regular Potato
10 years ago

Elijah Dukes! Still only 32. File him under players I had completely forgotten.

Yabo24
10 years ago

Davey Cameron, name another hitter besides Harper who moved through the minors this quick. Give him a year or two and he’ll be a .300 power hitter, maybe top 10 power in the league. The Cubs won’t need a bullpen when this kid pans out and they are scoring 10 a game…Also I find Cashman’s short porch comment to be nonsense. This kid hits 500 foot bombs (Ask Lousiville), he doesn’t need a Little League field to boost his numbers

dmgetz
10 years ago
Reply to  Yabo24

How does Schwarber get from where he is now to hitting .300? Even if you assume he cuts the strikeouts by a lot, from, say 28% to ~20%, you have to run something like a .350 BABIP to get to .300; that’s a number that only ~15 hit each year, and very few of them are power hitters. A BABIP like that, with decent power, is the territory of Bryce Harper, Paul Goldschmidt, or Mike Trout. And it’s not like, as he ages and comes back from a serious knee injury he is going to get a speed-related BABIP boost.

The short porch idea isn’t nonsense. Even if you have the power to hit anywhere, you benefit from a shorter fence.

Yabo24
10 years ago
Reply to  dmgetz

He hit .341 in college, I expect him to replicate what he did at IU. Certainly not .341 but definitely .300. And you just proved my point by mentioning Harper, Goldschmidt and Trout. Go check out their first 200 at bats in the pros, eerily similar to Schwarber’s.

thestatbook
10 years ago
Reply to  Yabo24

“He hit .341 in college, I expect him to replicate what he did at IU.”

Yes, because Major League pitching is the exact same level as Big Ten pitching…

Yabo24
10 years ago
Reply to  thestatbook

Ya Harper’s JUCO average was really impressive too!…Schwarber 2017 Season: .280, 29 Yabos, 85 ribbies. Book it

LHPSU
10 years ago
Reply to  Yabo24

Pedro Alvarez hit .349 in college.

Jason BMember since 2017
10 years ago
Reply to  Yabo24

It’s like having a discussion with a Mountain Dew ad.

Joey Butts
10 years ago
Reply to  Yabo24

All right, all right, very funny.

dmgetz
10 years ago
Reply to  Yabo24

There are a decent number of guys who put up strong numbers when they start out. Very few turn into one of the five or so best hitters in the game, and I don’t think it’s reasonable to think Schwarber will get to that point.

Schwarber hit .341 in college, but he also struck out ~11% of the time, going back to my original point – a high batting average almost always requires a better than average strikeout profile, and absolutely requires a huge BABIP *or* a good strikeout profile. Given Schwarber’s profile, style of play, swing type, zone-miss rate, etc, I don’t see any reason to expect either of those numbers to get significantly better. Can you give me an example of what you think is a plausible stat line for Schwarber (AB, average, HRs, K’s, BB’s) that has hit at .300?

Finally, take a look at notable Big 10 players in the major leagues:

Todd Frazier hit .347 in college; .280 in the majors
Alex Gordon, .353 in college, .265 in the majors
Nick Swisher, .323 in college, .249 in the majors

and some lesser-knowns:

Josh Phegley, .353 in college, .232 in the majors
Chris Getz, .355 in college, .250 in the majors

Schwarber is very good hitter, especially for his age, and I expect him to be very good for a number of years, but I just don’t see any way he gets to .300, especially not on a regular basis.

thestatbook
10 years ago
Reply to  dmgetz

The Big Ten would love to claim Alex Gordon. Just like they show video of Tommie Frazier on the Big Ten Network.

As a Husker fan, I love being in the Big Ten, but for crying out loud, you don’t get to claim Huskers pre-Big Ten era.

Same goes with Frazier at Rutgers.

thestatbook
10 years ago
Reply to  Yabo24

Guys like you are the exact reason this article had to be written in the first place.

Dominikk85Member since 2020
10 years ago

Is schwarber really a low contact hitter? He was in limited MLB service time but his minor league K rate for his career is 20%, which is about average. I realize that MLB is different but the real high K guys like Gallo already strike out a ton in the minors. Even Kris Bryant struck out way more than schwarber.

Of course schwarber could be a guy struggling with MLB stuff (breaking balls?) but his minor league stats dont show him as an extreme TTO guy.

I would not declare him the next big thing but I would give him time, maybe he can adjust and move his K rate closer to his milb stats.

MerlMember since 2018
10 years ago

I hope you’re right about the trade, but wrong about Schwarber’s future. I think he has 40+ HR talent. 50+ in AL East. I also believe he will walk more as he becomes more experienced in the majors. Five HR in nine post-season games as a 22 y/o says enough about the guy’s moxie. Send him to NY (although I hate the Yankees) for Chapman and Miller. He’ll be the franchises savior @ DH.

Ultimately, I don’t think the trade will happen. It’s too dreamy.

amdennis1990
10 years ago

Why is your projection for Schwarber so vastly different from Correa?

(Pause for a disclaimer: I am not saying Schwarber is a better player than Correa, I accept Correa has a better track record and more value but I would like to know why this projections are so different)

Correa is projected to more than double his production and surpass Mike Trout for the MLB WAR in 2018. When I asked about this projection on the trade value article I was told (by dave) “the system just loves Correa, as the history of guys who can hit like this at 20/21 in the big leagues is almost universally fantastic.”

What is so vastly different about Correa posting a 128 wRC+ through age 21 and Schwarber posting a 129 wRC+ through age 22? Is it the sample size? Is it the one year age difference? is it the HR/XBH? Is it the injury? or is it something else in his hit profile? Why doesn’t the projection system love what Schwarber is doing?

I accept Correa is a better player and his defensive output is obviously much better. Still I am trying to understand what makes Correa an 8 win player while Schwarber is a 1-3 win player. That is not a small difference in production.

thestatbook
10 years ago
Reply to  amdennis1990

Dave went through zone contact percentage, the fact he’s a left-handed pull hitter, HR/XBH, etc.

If Correa matches all of those factors and matches similar stat trends, then you could likely apply the same evaluation to him, but I’m guessing it’s a very different report we’d get.

amdennis1990
10 years ago
Reply to  thestatbook

His BABIP is pretty normal for a LH pull hitter. Other than the HR/XBH I dont see any facts justifying this level of regression in the projections (and I think a comment above made a great point that it is not fair to turn HR’s into doubles without turning any singles into doubles too). Schwarber produced 1.9 WAR in 273 PA last year and is now projected to produce 1.5 WAR in 500-600 PA in 2017. That is a massive regression projected.

Correa isn’t exactly a contact machine either. 22% K rate. 76% Contact%. Better than Schwarber sure but, does it really point to player that is 4 time as valuable? A high HR/XBH basically takes Schwarber from “almost universally fantastic” to a bit over average?

thestatbook
10 years ago
Reply to  amdennis1990

I’m not making an argument for or against what you suggested. You did a lot of decent research it seems, and you very well may be correct.

I was simply suggesting that there were a lot of factors that went into Dave’s article, that unless Correa matches all or at least most, you’re probably not going to be able to make a great comparison in this regard.

razor
10 years ago
Reply to  amdennis1990

Correa’s defense at the most premium of positions represents a decent chunk of the difference I’m sure, but this is a very fair question. Pretty sure if you did get an explanation for the WAR difference that the 18 month age gap that exists between them would be referenced as another reason why the ‘system’ loves Correa so much more. I do know that’s not b.s. and very real, but I also feel ya regarding the amount of WAR projection difference given the 18 month age difference and MiLB/MLB performance thus far. They took different paths. Correa has been playing professionally since he was 17. Schwarber enrolled at Indiana and went the college route. He got thru their system about as quickly as it can get done. Some have been promoted quicker, but not many.

WAR is also calculated differently here than it is at B-Ref for example. Actually, I know of three different WAR calculations among sites who currently use it with regularity and especially where and how defense is factored into the formula, you get fairly WIDE differences at times in individual WAR numbers for some players. Most everyone knows this…just saying.

maybeofftopic365
10 years ago

To echo a little bit what other commenters are saying, I think that while the points about BABIP and being a lefty are worth considering, the contact difficulties Schwarber had may have more to do with him being a 22 year old rookie who hadn’t had a “normal” promotion schedule than any flaw in his ability per se. While I don’t necessarily have contact % rates for his minor league stats, His minor league numbers up until AAA don’t really give the impression of someone who has a huge amount of difficulty making contact; his K%’s hover around 17-20%, which isn’t great but isn’t terrible. Only upon reaching AAA does his K% skyrocket to 34% (in just 17 games), and then he’s brought up to the majors, where his K% is at 28%, which is actually an improvement, albeit one from a small sample size. It could just be that Schwarber struggles making contact upon reaching a new level, before he figures it out; he wouldn’t be the first to do that.

EricR
10 years ago

If Schwarber profiles like Mike Napoli, don’t the Cubs realize they could get a Vernon Wells type for him!?

Schwarber for Kemp. Book it.

ashlandateam
10 years ago
Reply to  EricR

This is my favorite comment here.

Matt
10 years ago

As a Cubs fan, I’ve fought and died many times on the trade Schwarber hill. There is an irrational love for that guy in Chicago that I can’t see ending any time soon. My issues with hanging on to Schwarber don’t even dig deep into the advanced stats, my issues are simply that he’s a bad body player who was an awful defender *BEFORE* his knee was completely destroyed. That doesn’t even cover how a completely rebuilt knee will impact his bat. In my mind, Schwarber has to be treated like any other high upside, low floor prospect and you have to put the half season of success and monster scoreboard dingers out of your mind. Easier said than done of course.

All that said, as a Cubs fan, I’d be perfectly happy if he put a Joc Pederson looking strong side of a platoon season at the plate. Obviously Pederson runs more and gets the bonus for playing CF but there’s still a lot to like there. It isn’t worth holding on to if you can use him to held your team win now but there’s plenty of value in that, especially as a cheap cost controlled asset.

In the end, Schwarber is probably most valuable to the Cubs as a trade piece and Andrew Miller is basically Relief Kershaw so I wouldn’t be sad at all if it was say Miller and Chapman for Schwarber and pieces or some variation. It’s far easier to replace a bat like Schwarber via free agency than it is find an elite relief arm. The Cubs could very easily trade for a guy like Reddick and try to extend him or look to extend Fowler and do what they did this year and move Bryant and Zobrist out there in spurts.

Joey Butts
10 years ago
Reply to  Matt

The best analysis so far.

jdbolickMember since 2024
10 years ago

Off the top of my head, both Miller and Chapman feels like too much for Schwarber. I agree that his contact issues suggest offensive regression and that his HR/FB% is likely to fall a bit. Although he was passable in left field previously, the significant knee injury and his body type are legitimate reasons to be concerned about his ability to play in the outfield going forward. While I was hopeful that he could catch periodically before the injury, that’s now extremely doubtful if he is traded and all but certain not to happen if he stays in Chicago (due to Montero + Contreras). He probably should move to first base, which he can’t do with the Cubs. Moreover, he and Soler can’t realistically play at the same time opposite each other given how bad Soler has been in the field. That relegates Soler to fourth outfielder duty, which is fine since every team needs depth, but I’m still hopeful that Jorge will rebound from this season’s disappointing results.

Brett
10 years ago

Another factor not discussed in the article is Cubs org depth in the outfield.

Fowler will be gone. I get the feeling that Soler is gone. There has to be legitimate concern that Heyward will not be an offensive asset going forward. Almora would have to reach his offensive ceiling to qualify as an offensive asset. Szczur and Deweese are more platoon guys, and Jimenez is years away from his ceiling if he ever gets there.

The only other guy is whoever overflows from the infield. Bryant can be that guy too, and as mentioned in a comment above, Baez’s elite 3B defense maybe makes that move make more sense. But there’s no reason that Bryant can’t be the team’s everyday 3B. If so, then Zobrist is in the outfield for his decline years.

Schwarber at this time is the safest bet to be an offensive plus for the Cubs in an outfield defensive position. I’m certain this fact plays into the decision-making process for CHC as well..

Johnston
10 years ago

I hated seeing the comments above. If I had made the first post, it would have read: “Nice, well-reasoned article. Thank you. I have also had questions about Schwarber’s future value for some time now, and have been expecting to see the Cubs trade him for pitching.”

And no donnybrook would have broken out.

Trivia question: how many other active MLB players have four consonants in a row in their last name?

thestatbook
10 years ago
Reply to  Johnston

Brandon Kintzler
Jacoby Ellsbury
Old(ish) player: Dallas McPherson

Depending on your view of the letter ‘y’ as a vowel or consonant, Refsnyder & Forsythe could have 5 in a row.

And if ‘y’ is a consonant, Rzepczynski has 6 in a row.

Baseball Anagrams
10 years ago
Reply to  thestatbook

Justin Duchscherer had 5 in a row, without needing a ‘y’. I’m so glad he never made a trade value list 🙂

thestatbook
10 years ago

Great call on Duchscherer.

Johnston
10 years ago
Reply to  Johnston

“Active MLB players.” I count “y” as a vowel.

Steve
10 years ago

A little sleight of hand here by the author. His point about contact rate for 25 and under sluggers is a very convincing argument…..BUT …..Kyle Schwarber was 22 and under. Justin Upton as an example piled up 27 WAR IN HIS 22-27, and KS Is right there. Chris Davis as a 22 year old played 80 games and had a .8 WAR. mark Reynolds at 22 was in A ball. Olt at 22 was in ROOKIE league, as was Springer. Matt Joyce in AA, same with C Carter, as was Bryant for that matter. Does he have flaws, you bet but he was FAR FAR ahead of all those guys at 22, and one would expect him to stay ahead of them. And if THE WORST they get out of him pre-FA is Justin, well let’s say even Miller AND Chapman ain’t that. Run the chart again for 22 and under and then let’s hear the authors comments. My guess is, he’s a Yanks fan.

Joey Butts
10 years ago
Reply to  Steve

Right, that’s why he projected Miller to produce a full win less next year than this year.

Steve
10 years ago
Reply to  Joey Butts

Huh, what does that have to do with Schwarber? Unless you took a throwaway line as gospel truth. Sometimes sarcasm and implied criticism is taken far too literally by some. Also, my point still holds, he did, sorry he did, intentionally, or otherwise, lump Schwarber in a group where he does not belong. He, is way younger than those guys..any fool can se that given 3 full years more development it is far more reasonable to assert he will be far far better…than about the same. The fact he holds his own with guys 3 years older is an indication he will develop better than those guys..a fundamental basic assumption sabermetricians make all the time. Mr. Cameron didn’t. Let’s see the chart of 22 year olds, then we can have an honest debate on his relative value.

Paul22
10 years ago

There is no urgency for the Cubs. They will be in the post season for years to come. Just sign Chapman if the offseason, and Jansen too if they want. Post season is the roll of the dice anyways, no guarantees landing Miller or Chapman does anything for them, especially of the starters falter or the offense disappears. I think they should focus on boosting the offense a bit, especially in RF, since that will be the cheapest option.

They might also look at David Robertson to bolster the pen

Steve
10 years ago

Quick follow up to my earlier post. By Fangraphs own data and presuming we can pro-rate Schwarbers WAR to a full season and compare that to other 22 year old rookies, since 1961, Schwarber places about 11th. Ahead of him are Dick Alle, Longoria, Reggie, Beltran, Hanley Ramirez, Puig, Jim Ray Hart and a few others. Behind him are Andre Dawson, McCutcheon,, Mauer, Hrbek, Jim Rice, Boby Bonds, Reggie Smith…you get the point. You do not trade a guy like that, regardless of his flaws for 2 rental Relievers. Sorry,, I just don’t see Theo letting him go unless he gets young, high profile, controllable assets, particularly pitchers..and more than 1 or 2.

dmgetz
10 years ago
Reply to  Steve

Quick point — Miller has 2.5 year on his contract, so he wouldn’t be a rental.

I think taking Schwarber’s 2015 WAR an extrapolating over the course of a full season can give an overly optimistic view of what is to be expected moving forward because (1) he gets a bump from playing a decent amount of catcher last year that he likely won’t get moving forward (I would be surprised to see Schwarber catch again the majors) and (2) he was actually a pretty good baserunner last year, which I would not expect to continue given his body type, knee injury and, of course, just getting older.

The position issue really is the crux of his valuation for me. If I thought there were any chance he could be even an ok ML catcher, he would be off limits. If I thought he could be a slightly below average corner OF, I would be hesitant. But it is very difficult for me to imagine him as anything other than a bad corner outfielder or ok first basemen, in which case his overall value — even despite his offensive skills — takes a significant hit.

Steve
10 years ago
Reply to  dmgetz

My bad on Miller, I thought it was 2017 only.

Anyway, the point here is to dispute Cameron. Not argue the reasonableness of this trade. Virtually his entire argument is that Schwarber comps with some very iffy players. Yes he ain’t perfect, and it may be optimistic to pro-rate him out to 4.1 for WAR last year, agreed. There is a big however here, my point is, if clumsily made, is that he doesn’t comp AT ALL with the guys Cameron mentions, and given the 3 full year age advantage to KS it is such a glaringly huge mistake one must consider the possibility it was done intentionally to mislead. He was miles and miles better than any of those guys at 22..literally miles and it is far more reasonable to expect him to be far better than those guys going forward than about the same AND he does comp very favorably with the guys I mentioned. Was I padding his resume a bit, maybe, but pro-rating out a season is a tool used by every analyst, so why can’t I? Topping that off, virtually everyone has far far better projections that Cameron does, and he pulled his virtually out of thin air, so again, is this a legit analysis or a hatchet job with a motive? All I asked is, let me see those swing rate comps against 22 and under rooks, not 25 and under rooks, and then read his essay.

kerrywoodwins20
10 years ago

The author cherry picks one statistic and then makes projections on a player’s value that are around 1/3rd as valuable as other projections that factor in ALL information, rather than just cherry picked statistics from a relatively small sample size.

I wonder what the author would have thought about Javier Baez’s trade value after his 2014 season. Probably would have suggested the Cubs trade him for a bucket of used baseballs and a taco bell coupon.

I’m glad that Theo isn’t that short sighted.

DancingInPDX
10 years ago

Awesome article, Dave. Question: to what degree is a player’s career Z-contact% a function of time spent in the minors? Kyle, for instance, was barely 80 games out of college before being thrown in the majors. I.e. can we expect his contact rate to improve more than others?

Joey Butts
10 years ago

A lot of talk about how Schwarber might be undervalued here, but shockingly little about Miller. He’s working on a 2.5 WAR season, but he’ll only he worth 1.5 next year? That’s . . . pessimistic. And then, suddenly we’re accepting that WAR sufficiently values elite relievers? I’m not suggesting that we rely on WPA instead, but we should at least boost his WAR total a bit. I can’t see him being worth less than 6 wins through 2018.

Johnston
10 years ago

Schwarber for Chris Archer?

Unique New York
10 years ago

As a Yankees fan (upfront, I’m admitting my bias), I do not want to see the Yankees trade Miller for Schwarber. Schwarber’s 2015 season produced 0.0275 WAR per game played, while Miller’s seasons 2012 through 2016 have produced 0.0251 WAR per game played. That means they have produced roughly the same value per game, so Schwarber’s extra value is really that he plays every game. You could argue that Miller is just as effective per game, if not more so, than Schwarber ( I accounted for seasons before Miller became an elite reliever in the calculation).

Yes, Schwarber could be a great player. Yes, Schwarber is likely worth more WAR over the next few years than Miller, but only because he plays more games as a position player. I just feel that the Yankees would be better suited getting a few of the Cubs top prospects that are younger, do not have injuries, and are two-way players (Ian Happ, Torres, etc.)

Would I trade Chapman for Schwarber? Heck yes, who wouldn’t!
Would I trade Miller for Schwarber? No, because of the points I mentioned.

Since both the Cubs and the Yankees overvalue the player they are trading away, I doubt a trade gets done that includes Schwarber.

dmgetz
10 years ago

“That means they have produced roughly the same value per game, so Schwarber’s extra value is really that he plays every game.”

Is that not always the case when looking at pitchers versus everyday players? It doesn’t seem unreasonable to me given that pitchers,when playing, have a lot more influence over a game than position players.

By that same reasoning, couldn’t you look at Mike Trout, at ~0.057 WAR/game and decide he is less valuable than Colin McHugh, at ~0.12 WAR/game?

johnforthegiants
10 years ago

I would like to ask cubs fans here: would you trade schwarber for miller one-for-one?

Alex K
10 years ago

No way.

CosmoMember since 2024
10 years ago

No, I wouldn’t. Add Chapman and you have my attention.

I’m not an accountant, but I come from a family of them, and trading Schwarber for Miller doesn’t seem like the most efficient use of resources.

I think them adding Montgomery for Vogs lessens the need to trade for Miller. I’m not saying they’re the same, but they can now trade for the cheaper Chapman, who would prefer to remain a closer, and still have the lefty setup guy they’ve needed.

Basically, Montgomery and Chapman is a lot cheaper than Miller and Chapman… you’d be getting 90% of the performance without having to trade Schwarber.

But honestly, I trust Jed and Theo’s judgment more than my own.

renisel
10 years ago

I’m inclined to say “no”, but then I think about a not-so-far-fetched critical late-inning matchup against Bryce Harper in the NLCS. Harper’s wRC+ over the past two seasons is around 35 points lower against lefties; and Miller’s xFIP hasn’t been above 1 against lefties since 2013.

On the flip-side, I think about that same situation with Miller on the Nationals, and Rizzo or Schwarber (in a future season) at the plate. The overall WAR may not come out in the Cubs’ favor in such a trade, but not all wins are equal, and there is value in depriving opponents of his services. I’m not sure I’d make such a trade if I were in charge, but I can think of enough justification that I wouldn’t be devastated if it were executed by the guys who get paid to make these decisions.

CosmoMember since 2024
10 years ago
Reply to  renisel

Yeah, but trading Schwarber for Miller isn’t the only way to get Harper out.

renisel
10 years ago
Reply to  Cosmo

No, it’s not. You could send me out there and there is a chance I’d get him out. But if you want to maximize your odds, you go with Miller. There is a big difference between Miller and anybody who the Cubs currently have on their roster in that situation. The upgrade from the alternative at catcher or left field when switching to Schwarber, however, is not necessarily all that significant.

CosmoMember since 2024
10 years ago
Reply to  renisel

But there’s not much difference between Miller and Chapman, and Chapman will cost less. And why is Schwarber the only way to get Miller? They do have other commodities. Theo is pretty creative.

This is the problem with fans’ opinions on decisions… too often they think there’s only one way or option to go.

BTW, Montgomery actually has better splits against lefties than Miller… if you’re worried about getting Harper out.

johnforthegiants
10 years ago
Reply to  Cosmo

This is a point which is often missed, that if the goal is to get particular batters out in the playoffs it can be more effective and much cheaper to have a loogy, or a couple of them, than a closer. If you just want to get out harper or rizzo or gonzales, who cares if the pitcher has .500 average vs righties, there won’t be a pinchhitter so you’ll get the matchup you want. This closermania is just stupid, and unfortunately the giants seem to have caught it too.

renisel
10 years ago

There are a few things I don’t think are being sufficiently considered here. First, I don’t agree that the Cubs are going to place a huge discount on the future value of a player. Their stated philosophy, which I agree with, is that the way to win titles is not to go all in for one shot, but rather to build a team that repeatedly makes it to the crapshoot that is the playoffs. Their current team is in good shape to do that, and having a guy like Schwarber on the roster helps do that with controlled costs longer into the future.

Second, there is an assumption that Schwarber is really just a left fielder and will not do much catching in the future. It’s entirely possible that things turn out that way, but I would not just assume it and run with it. I suspect that the Cubs see significant value in the possibility of having Schwarber available to platoon with Contreras. Contreras has done pretty well against righties to date, but Schwarber absolutely demolished them last year.

Building off that last point and adding a point against Schwarber’s value, he had a wRC+ of just 60 facing lefties last year. Unless he finds a way to drastically improve that (which he may, as Rizzo did), he is a big liability if the opponent brings in a lefty reliever late in a close game.

Overall, I think we’ll get a better idea of what he’s going to be over the next couple seasons, and there is a lot of potential upside. I would bet the Cubs would prefer to wait and watch that process unless they get significantly more than a lefty reliever in return.

Damaso
10 years ago

what’s weird here is that we know Dave has access to Schwarber’s 5yr zips forecast, and values that forecast highly, yet still makes up his own forecast out of thin air.

I mean, does that mean his entire trade value series was based on dismissable data?

johnforthegiants
10 years ago
Reply to  Damaso

It’s pretty clear there’s an agenda here. He wants the cubs to get miller. Let’s try to figure out why…

JonKneeV
10 years ago

It’s not really the purpose of the article itself, but moreso the comment discussion – we need to consider opportunity cost. If the Cubs can pick up a really good reliever that isn’t left handed (but still effective vs LHB) while keeping Schwarber,

2015 didn’t really see any elite relievers change teams.

But Andrew Miller (ironic) was traded in 2014 from Boston to Baltimore as a rental before becoming a free agent in 2015. Baltimore gave up FG’s number 36 prospect (Callis, BP, and BA all had him in the 60s).

Joakim Soria was traded in 2014 during his peak performance (1.06 FIP) and had 1.5 years of control. The Rangers received Jake Thompson (unranked) and Corey Knebel.

Huston Street was traded in 2014 (2.89 FIP) for a package of prospects (no headliners). Street had 1.5 years of control.

There’s no recent history that shows an elite reliever is worth a major league ready (if eligible, probably top 20 prospect) player. That doesn’t mean that the Yankees aren’t asking for that. But most Cubs fans (and I don’t think I’m being all that biased) would rather keep Schwarber and deal prospects or even Jorge Soler to get a good reliever even if it’s not going to be Miller/Chapman.

Also, there might be a Rizzo-Chapman dynamic to be considered.

jiveballer
10 years ago

I don’t think the future reduction adjustment for WAR is necessary. The Yankees need the future value just as much as the Cubs need the present value – the entire point of the trade in the first place.

razor
10 years ago

I do think Schwarber would be better off at 1B or at DH in the A.L., but the kid also blew thru all levels of the Cub system by age 22 in basically a year and a half, going .333/.429/.613 in 621 PA’s. His xbh line was 35/4/34 and he walked 88 times. I’m not sure how you could look like too much of a better hitting prospect than that. He’s never likely to be as valuable as Bryant because on the periphery Bryant brings a lot more to the table with his baserunning and defensive versatility, not to mention his solid defense in general, but Schwarber would hardly be the first kid to improve across the board from his early 20’s at the MLB level.

I looked up Jeff Bagwell’s minor league numbers because this whole story reminds me at a little bit of his story and the Larry Anderson trade. Schwarber may not turn out quite as productive as Bagwell but I’m also not on board with penalizing Schwarber for hitting left-handed. Lol, he gets the platoon advantage the vast majority of the time and I don’t have his left/right splits in the minor leagues at hand right now, but however he performed he ended up hitting .333 with power and walks. His MLB sample size means almost zero to me because he was 22 years old last season and we don’t know yet what kind of hitter he’s gonna end up being. Maybe he really can be Jim Thome or David Ortiz. Maybe Jeff Bagwell. Maybe Dave is right and he’ll just be pretty good and not great at the plate.

Just saying that you can’t name very many 22 year old players with his minor league resume at the plate, not to mention his overall production in an even smaller sample last year at the MLB level. If Dave wants to trade him for a really good left-handed relief pitcher, so be it. I would never do it myself.

moloko5
10 years ago

I like how he just randomly discounts Schwarber’s future projected WAR because it’s in the future. Clearly the Cubs management isn’t discounting it and have repeatedly said their priority is to build a team that competes for the World Series for the next five years and beyond. Let’s say they ignore that future production and get Chapman and Miller. How much of an increase in their probability does that actually give when everyone knows that more often than not the best team doesn’t win the crapshoot that is the MLB post season in a given year? It’s much smarter, therefore, to try to make the playoffs year after year then make short sighted trades – particularly when your core players are under team control for the next six years.

As other commenters have pointed out, he’s been projected as about a 4 WAR per year player. So to get around this, Cameron focuses on his low contact rate in his first half season, uses that to back of the envelope compare him to someone like Napoli (which any analyst would say is his floor, not his ceiling), then he takes this and uses it as the expected WAR as opposed to the low projection that it is. He still hasn’t been able to make the case that it is worth a high end reliever for two years, so he further discounts it by 20%, just because. Clearly the Cubs management sees things very differently, so this is all moot, anyway.

Mockingbyrd
10 years ago

I think Cameron left out the most important intangible – Schwarber swings like Babe Ruth. Am I the only one that sees that? Like Ruth, his bat held high, he has this no effort swing, Growing up I thought Ruth looked like a pansy compared to real hitters, yet the ball just kept going. I’ve never seen another hitter that looks like Ruth. Same build, too.

CosmoMember since 2024
10 years ago
Reply to  Mockingbyrd

As a budding Cubs fan in 1987, I copied Andre Dawson’s swing. Got pretty good at it too. But having the same swing as a HOFer didn’t make me any better.

Chill
10 years ago
Reply to  Mockingbyrd

He doesn’t just look like and swing like Ruth, he hits like him too! Those 5 post season homers were jaw dropping in their magnificence. All against good to great pitchers. All moonshots. Small sample size be damned, I’m not sure giving up on a player as young and promising as Kyle Schwarber for one or two relievers makes much sense. Even if you take a pessimistic projection as gospel, Schwarber seems more valuable than a pair of lefty relievers. If you recall his post season performance and are more bullish on Kyle’s future, it’s not even close.

BritishCub
10 years ago

two

BritishCub
10 years ago

hundred

BritishCub
10 years ago

comments! go dave with stirring the fangraph’s pot 😛

E L
10 years ago

I think http://www.northsidebaseball.com/articles/cubs-articles/43-yes-kyle-schwarber-is-worth-more-than-a-relief-pitcher is a pretty persuasive takedown.

Solid trolling to get those 200+ comments, though.

Jason BMember since 2017
10 years ago
Reply to  E L

That’s exactly what it was. Not a useful, relevant discussion. “Trolling.”

File under: “that term…it does not mean what you think it means.”