Vote For JJ (Or Carson)

Most of baseball’s awards races are formalities this year. The favorites are clear, and deservedly so. Pete Crow-Armstrong is having one of the greatest seasons of the 21st century. Jacob Misiorowski is a closer throwing starter innings. Bobby Witt Jr. has been terrific, but Yordan Alvarez is unsolvable. Cam Schlittler has more fastballs than batters have answers. Kevin McGonigle is a phenom. But I’m most interested in the sixth major race: National League Rookie of the Year. The gambling odds would tell you that it too is settled, with Sal Stewart the prohibitive favorite. But if I had a vote this year, I’d cast it for JJ Wetherholt, and I want to explain myself because I think this race provides a fascinating look into old school versus new school baseball statistics, and how both have blind spots.
Before we get into my argument, let’s get a few disclaimers out of the way. I am not voting for NL Rookie of the Year. I’m not a member of the BBWAA, even. I haven’t placed any wagers on NL ROY, or on any awards, or on anything even peripherally related to this. I was a Cardinals fan before I started working in baseball, but that has faded away. I have a lot of fond memories of Ozzie Smith, but I’m a fan of the sport now, not a team, and I’ve watched more Reds games than Cardinals games this year because I love watching Elly De La Cruz play. No one in the world is truly unbiased, but I don’t have a horse in this race in any meaningful way.
With that out of the way, let’s get down to brass tacks. The two leading candidates for the award are Stewart and Wetherholt, with Carson Benge a distant-enough third according to the odds that I’m largely leaving him out of the discussion, though he’ll make some cameos. Stewart’s résumé revolves around his thunderous bat. He’s batting .266/.333/.465, with 32 homers and a gaudy 110 RBI. Even in an offense-friendly home park, that’s good for a 115 wRC+, 15th-best among qualifying first basemen, and of course the RBI total is better than that. He’s played so-so defense at first – not that I care much about that in award voting – and has accrued 2.2 WAR per our calculation of the statistic.
If Stewart’s calling card is his power, Wetherholt’s is his lack of weaknesses. He’s hitting .244/.343/.365, good for a 103 wRC+, with 17 homers despite playing his home games in cavernous Busch Stadium. He walks a ton and rarely strikes out. He’s a plus baserunner and an elite defender at second base, where he’s the favorite for a Gold Glove and is sure to draw strong consideration in my Fielding Bible voting. Between his ability to get on base, his baserunning, his defense, and the fact that WAR values second basemen more highly than first basemen for the same batting line, we have him at 4.5 WAR, the best mark among NL rookies. Benge is second on that list at 3.7 WAR; he’s been a better hitter than Wetherholt and a better defender than Stewart.
Great – now let’s throw WAR out the window. When I tell you that one of these players has nearly double the WAR of the other and that the one with the lower WAR total is a favorite to win the award, that should tell you that “but look at the WAR” isn’t a good argument. I’ll mention the building blocks of WAR again in this article, because the building blocks of WAR are “playing baseball” more or less, but the headline number? Banished to the shadow realm.
While “rookie” is exceedingly well defined for the purposes of this award, “of the year” has no obvious qualifications. It’s simply the best rookie-eligible player in each voter’s estimation. That leaves the field wide open, and it means that many different interpretations have merit. My own interpretation is that the award should go to the best-performing rookie, with their expected future production used sparingly as a tiebreaker. If a voter wanted to instead vote for the rookie they thought had the brightest future, though, I wouldn’t argue with them – that’s as much a rookie of the year as my version.
This year, my interpretation means that I need to compare Stewart’s power to Wetherholt’s all-around game. And like I mentioned, we won’t be using WAR to make the decision for us. It’s clearly true that being better at defense is important, and it’s also clearly true that if two players had the same batting line, you’d prefer an average-fielding shortstop over a DH. But I don’t think it’s reasonable to say that Wetherholt was nearly three wins more valuable than Stewart by virtue of position and defense. That’s just too many wins for me to take as gospel. Defensive statistics are noisy. Positional adjustments aren’t set in stone. We’re going to go component-by-component instead.
It’s important to give Stewart appropriate credit for his run production ability, and I don’t think that wRC+ fully captures it. That statistic measures every single plate appearance in a neutral context. That’s very useful for figuring out the future, because hitters don’t control the context they bat in, but it’s less useful for saying how much a hitter helped his team win in the games they actually played.
I don’t think RBI numbers are a very good way of capturing that either, though. It’s immediately obvious that team context has a ton to do with RBI totals. A hitter who batted with the bases loaded every time would have a ludicrous RBI total even if he was terrible; a hitter who always came up with the bases empty could be peak Ted Williams and still put up paltry RBI numbers. Now, those two scenarios aren’t realistic. But leadoff hitters bat with runners on base far less often than cleanup hitters. Teams with poor offenses give their hitters fewer opportunities to drive a run home. Like many statistics, RBI totals reflect a blend of skill, opportunity, and chance – round ball and round bat, as they always say.
Fortunately, there’s a statistic that accounts for opportunity: the clumsily-named RE24. That name sounds like an experimental drug from a sci-fi movie, but it’s actually a straightforward idea. Take the situation before a hitter comes to the plate. Then take the situation after they finish batting, accounting for runs scored, runners advanced, and whether or not they made an out. Turn it all into run expectancy, and give them credit (or assign them blame) for the difference in run-scoring expectation before and after their at-bat.
To put this in more concrete terms, consider a plate appearance that starts with a runner on third and one out. A sacrifice fly moves the expected runs scored in that inning from 0.86 to 1.1, crediting the hitter with 0.24 runs of value. A strikeout drops the expected runs scored that inning from 0.86 to 0.32, docking the hitter 0.54 runs. Or consider a runner on third with two outs. A single moves run scoring expectations from 0.32 to 1.21, a gain of 0.89 runs. A walk, on the other hand, only bumps the run expectancy from 0.32 to 0.48, a gain of 0.16 runs. Want a statistic that says a single is better than a walk when you can drive in a run, or that strikeouts with runners in scoring position are bad? RE24 does the trick. It also handles the other side of the equation well. With the bases empty, a walk really is as good as a single, and RE24 agrees.
By considering the state when a hitter comes to the plate, RE24 accounts for opportunity. All you can do as a hitter is play the hand you’re dealt. RE24 measures “the hand you’re dealt” in a slightly smarter way than just ignoring it completely. I don’t think it’s controversial to say that situational hitting – changing your approach based on the game situation – is a real thing that batters do. RE24 sets the incentives right; it gives you credit for doing the thing that makes your team score the most runs, and by construction “the thing that makes your team score the most runs” is different in different situations.
RE24 thinks Stewart is pretty dang good. It has him 20.3 runs above average this year. In other words, a perfectly league average batter hitting in his spot would have cost the Reds 20-ish runs in one way or another – fewer homers, more strikeouts in big spots, fewer baserunners to open innings, the whole gamut of ways that Stewart has added value this season. Those RBIs are a big part of it. He’s second on his team in RE24 behind De La Cruz (sure, checks out), and second only to TJ Rumfield, who gets to play in Colorado, among qualifying NL rookies. Given that RE24 doesn’t adjust for park, I’m comfortable saying that no NL rookie did more with their bat than Stewart.
Of course, Wetherholt was no slouch offensively either. While Stewart batted second, third, and fourth and cashed in runners in front of him, Wetherholt led off in every game he played this year. His OBP-heavy game is a great fit for how often he came up with the bases empty; when there are no runners to advance, a walk is as good as a hit, and his double-digit walk rate is perfect in that spot. RE24 gives Wetherholt credit for 10.2 runs above average. (Benge is marginally ahead of Wetherholt here at 11.3 runs.)
That’s one estimate of the gap in value between Stewart’s bat and Wetherholt’s bat – 10 to 11 runs. If you’re interested in another, there’s Win Probability Added. Think RE24, but instead of measuring how many runs are likely to score, WPA measures how likely the batting team is to win before and after the plate appearance. No one cares if you hit a grand slam in a 23-3 blowout. A two-run single, down a run in the ninth, is far more valuable to a team’s chances of winning. Why not account for that in our statistics?
WPA thinks that Stewart has added about 1.4 wins to the Reds’ total, as compared to a league average hitter, based on what he’s done in the situations he’s faced. That’s pretty good! Only five rookie hitters in all of baseball have a better mark, and four of them play in the American League. But the fifth member of that group is Wetherholt, who checks in at 1.99 WPA. Though he’s been a worse hitter than Stewart overall, his worst performances have come when there are no stakes. In low-leverage situations, he’s batting a putrid .228/.340/.296, 12% below average. The rest of the time, he’s been 14% above average offensively. In other words, he concentrated his best performances when it mattered most. Stewart, on the other hand, has been steady: very good in high leverage, good in medium leverage, good in low leverage. Benge looks worse by WPA; thanks to some rough performances in big spots, he only gets credit for 0.5 wins.
I don’t think that WPA is a fair measure for evaluating the best rookie, so I would not consider it if I were voting. I mentioned it just in case a voter reading this wanted to take clutchness into account. There’s no evidence that it’s a skill. There’s no evidence that this means Wetherholt will continue to play his best when it matters most. But if you want to give the award to the hitter whose offense was worth the most expected wins at the moment it happened, that would surprisingly be Wetherholt.
I’m much more aligned with RE24’s accounting of the world for this award. I love WPA for awards like MVP that care about “valuable” rather than “best,” and I’m sure I’ll get an article out of that in the long winter we have ahead. I concur that Stewart is a better hitter than Wetherholt, and I think 12 runs is a perfectly reasonable estimate for how much better. He’s been very good in the role the Reds deployed him in, cashing in baserunners. Wetherholt has been good at getting on base to set the table, but Stewart’s bat is clearly more valuable.
One last point on the RBI front: Stewart’s RBI total is impressive, of course, and I don’t think “RBIs don’t matter” is a reasonable dismissal of that. It’s certainly not a way to win an argument. Runs win games, after all. But even if you care a lot about RBIs, you have to adjust them for context. Stewart was 10th in the majors this year when it came to having runners on base when he batted. The top 10 averaged 95 RBI. He did better than that average, but it’s not like his opportunity set didn’t matter. When you bat with so many dudes aboard, you’re going to drive some of them home. We care about how much better he did in the situations he was put into, and 15 extra RBI is no joke, nor are the 21 runs above average that RE24 credits him with. But you can’t just say 110 RBI with no context, because the Reds did a really good job of setting Stewart up with runners on base.
Next, let’s consider baserunning. Wetherholt has stolen 14 bases. Stewart has stolen 15. But Wetherholt is quite efficient, with only one time caught stealing, while Stewart has been gunned down six times. That isn’t good considering that you need to run a 75%-ish success rate on steals to break even. Stewart’s aggression has cost the Reds about half a run compared to just not attempting to steal, while Wetherholt’s attempts have added about 1.5 runs to St. Louis’ ledger.
Excluding steals, Stewart has also cost the Reds on the basepaths. He takes an extra base on just 25% of opportunities, and he’s also made seven outs on the bases this year. Conversely, Wetherholt runs the bases like the leadoff hitter he is. He takes an extra base on 52% of his chances to do so, and he’s only made a single out on the bases this year. That’s an enormous gap. One way of thinking about it? Stewart has been on second base when his team hit a single 11 times this year. He stopped at third five times, scored five times, and got thrown out at home once. Wetherholt has been on second when his team hit a single 20 times this year; he’s stopped at third four times and scored 16 times.
That’s a lot of value that doesn’t show up in the box score. Specifically, if you assign run values to all of that based on how much advancing or making an out changes your team’s scoring expectation, Stewart has been 3.5 runs below average, while Wetherholt has been 1.8 runs above average. Between that and the gap in steals, there’s a seven-run gap in baserunning value between the two. Benge is even a hair better than Wetherholt on the bases, for the record. That passes the sniff test for me; on our leaderboards, Wetherholt and Benge are each one of the best 20 baserunners in baseball this year, while Stewart is one of the 20 worst. But baserunning just isn’t all that important – seven runs of difference is very little. Heck, Yordan Alvarez is a worse baserunner than Stewart and it just doesn’t matter.
The tale of the tape on offense looks like this:
| Metric | Stewart | Wetherholt | Benge |
|---|---|---|---|
| FG Off* | 8.1 | 5.3 | 13.1 |
| RE24 | 20.3 | 10.2 | 11.3 |
| BsR | -3.9 | 3.2 | 3.6 |
| WPA** | 1.35 | 1.99 | 0.53 |
**: denominated in wins, while all other stats are denominated in runs
I think it’s pretty clear that Stewart has been the better player on offense this year, and I think it’s reasonable to think that Benge has been roughly as good as him. I think it’s equally clear that the gap is fairly narrow. Stewart has gotten run-scoring opportunities and cashed them in adroitly. Wetherholt has been a smaller-scale success, but he’s also been good at his role. He leads off and gets on base. We like that, just like we like sluggers who send runners on the basepaths home to celebrate. Wetherholt is also getting it done on the basepaths, while Stewart isn’t. But even though Wetherholt has been one of the best baserunners in baseball and Stewart one of the worst, that gap is smaller than the difference in their production with the bat.
If we were only allowed to consider offensive value, I’d vote for Stewart over Wetherholt. I might vote for Benge over both of them. Considering how many different statistics I looked at that all landed in a similar place, I think the only fair read is that the three are fairly close. All three of these guys were assets to their team on offense, as I’m quite sure that fans of their teams would tell you. But defense matters too, and realistically, this one isn’t as close.
Now, it’s good to remember that defensive metrics are noisy and that you shouldn’t take them as gospel. It’s very hard to measure defensive talent. If someone quotes you an FRV number and tells you that it proves, beyond a doubt, how good a player was with the glove, you have my permission to make a fart noise with your mouth to show them how you feel about it. But let me make some gentle assertions and see what you think about them.
I assert that for the same offensive value, you’d prefer to have a second baseman compared to a first baseman. I don’t think this is particularly controversial. Jose Altuve and Vladimir Guerrero Jr. have very similar career batting lines. Regardless of how you feel about the banging scheme, does anyone think Vlad’s 132 wRC+ at first is more valuable than Altuve’s 127 wRC+ at second? Second basemen aren’t as good of hitters as first basemen! Big league first basemen have a 115 wRC+ this year; big league second basemen have a 95 wRC+ (right fielders are at a 102 wRC+).
The reason for that split is that there’s some minimum defensive level necessary to play second base, and a lot of first basemen don’t clear it. If they did, they’d go play second and improve their team’s offense by a huge amount. I don’t require you to convert that gap into some exact number of wins, but surely, you’ll concede the weak form of my argument – given the same results on offense, a second baseman is more valuable than a first baseman.
Okay, another assertion: JJ Wetherholt is a plus defensive second baseman. Again, I don’t think this is controversial. Every advanced metric says that he’s phenomenal out there. He made only two errors in more than 1,000 innings, the third-lowest mark out of 29 second basemen who played 500 or more innings. He notched 0.48 assists plus putouts per inning – outs per inning, roughly speaking. That’s fifth highest out of that group of 29. He was one of the best at making outs, and also one of the best at avoiding errors. He was first in double plays started per inning, though I’ll give some of that credit to Masyn Winn. He’s the best defensive second baseman by a mile according to Statcast’s FRV, and in the top five according to both DRS and Baseball Prospectus’ RDA. He passes the eye test. He’s the betting favorite to win the NL Gold Glove at second base. You don’t have to put a run value on it to say that Wetherholt has been an excellent fielder at an important defensive position.
One last assertion about defense: Sal Stewart is a middling defender. I’m not trying to say he’s bad. He played across the infield as a prospect, and the Reds have occasionally run him out at second and third this year, but they prefer to play him at first base. His versatility is occasionally valuable even now – he’s made four mid-game position switches in the last two months – but for the most part, he’s their everyday first baseman. That makes sense to me; that’s where our prospect team thought he’d end up, where scouts across the industry thought he’d end up, and where his team clearly thinks he’s the best fit.
I don’t believe the advanced metrics that say Stewart is a bad first base defender. It’s very hard to figure out defensive value at first base, and while Statcast thinks he’s below average at receiving throws, I’m not confident enough in their numbers, given the newness of the statistic and the few innings Stewart has played, to think he’s anything other than average. I bet he’ll improve over time, too; the Reds didn’t give him much playing time at first in the minors, so he’ll continue to learn on the job. But nevertheless, he’s not some defensive wizard out there.
That doesn’t matter all that much when it comes to my estimation of Stewart’s trajectory as a baseball player. He plays a position where they pay you to hit, and he hits. Sounds good to me. But you can have that in your head, and also say that on the defensive side of the ball, you’d prefer Wetherholt. Forget the magnitude for a minute – Gold Glove-contender second baseman or bat-first corner infielder looking for a defensive home. Leave their offense out of the comparison and weigh the two defensive profiles against each other, and there’s a clear winner.
Benge doesn’t fit quite as cleanly into the discussion here, so I left him for last. He’s a good right fielder, thanks in large part to his cannon arm; he’s thrown out 10 baserunners on the year. Generally speaking, I’d rather have an excellent second baseman than a good right fielder, but this is a closer call for me. To continue my analogizing to past Astros, I’d prefer Altuve (career 127 wRC+) to George Springer (career 128 wRC+). But defensive metrics are noisy, and if you thought Benge was just as good of a defender as Wetherholt, I’d disagree with you but wouldn’t think you were being unreasonable.
Where does that leave us? With a decision to make about how much we care about hitting, baserunning, and fielding. I can’t choose those weights for you. You might think that hitting is worth 30 times more than baserunning or fielding, or that baserunning is the most important by a mile. I think you’d be silly to think either, but your opinions are your own. I can, however, tell you my own views.
Of those three phases, hitting is the one I care about most. It’s the most stable, and you can stack up the most value there. Alvarez, the best hitter in baseball this year, checks in at 70 RE24. Crow-Armstrong, in one of the greatest defensive seasons of all time, is something like 25 runs above average in center. Witt is first in baseball in baserunning value, 8.5 runs above average. The ranges don’t lie.
But we’re not choosing between the best hitter in baseball and the best fielder in baseball. We’re choosing between a good-hitting first baseman, a solid-hitting second baseman who’s also a very good defender and baserunner, and a right fielder who does everything well. If Wetherholt were swinging a wet noodle out there, it wouldn’t matter how many double plays he turned or how many times he took the extra base. But heck, he got on base more frequently than Stewart this year in a tougher home park for offense, and he’s also approaching the 20-homer plateau. Benge is also right on the doorstep of 20 homers, and he’s similarly electric on the bases and no slouch in the field. They aren’t chopped liver.
For me, the decision is very close at the top – and it’s between Wetherholt and Benge. I’d put Stewart in third despite his enviable run production totals. I understand why Stewart is a leading contender despite WAR not liking his season. I think that people who say to completely ignore RBIs and batting average are missing the point. But I think that blindly taking RBI totals is just as bad as blindly taking WAR totals (worse, really, but both are bad). Context is important everywhere in life, and baseball is no exception. For me, the sum total of Wetherholt’s and Benge’s seasons across hitting, running, and fielding is better than Stewart’s in the same categories. I’d vote for Wetherholt, but I’ll level with you: I started this tale of the tape thinking it was a clear choice and ended it thinking that I’d be pretty happy voting for Benge too.
If you’re a voter reading this, I hope you take my advice into consideration and look at each candidate’s total contributions in context to make your decision. Like I said, I wouldn’t fault you for voting for Stewart if you think his performance at the plate is so staggering that the rest of it doesn’t matter. But if you’re just looking at the RBI total and going on that, I urge you to broaden your horizons just a little bit before making a choice. And if you’re a fan, well, there’s really no losing here. Any of these three would be deserving winners. I hope you enjoyed this comically long discussion of the most fascinating awards race of the season in any case.
Ben is a writer at FanGraphs. He can be found on Bluesky @benclemens.
Living in Cincinnati, we have had so little this year. Can’t we just have this?
I’m sure Cardinals and Mets fans feel the same.
Speaking as a Reds fan, I get the urge for some kind of celebration of Big Sal (it’s been a brutal year even by Reds standards), but also a part of me thinks that any recognition of this type (ROY) could be seen by some in the Reds FO as a sign of saying ‘see? we’re doing things right! be grateful for the kernels of baseball joy we’re giving you!’ (#whereyougonnago)
And yes, absolutely sure that Mets fans feel the same way. As a diehard Reds fan, the Cards can kick rocks. (I acknowledge it’s been a rough year for STL as well, Wetherholt inarguably deserves the award as outlined here and elsewhere, etc.)
If Benge didn’t have a brutal first month of the season he’d have an even stronger case as imo he’s been the best rookie in the nl since May. Also don’t sleep on McLean as besides for May he had a very good season. I do agree it will be between Stewart and Wetherholt and no matter who wins there will be meltdowns from one side of the argument or another.
You’re kind of underselling this. He’s been the 10th best position player in the NL by WAR since May 1st. He’s basically been Jackson Chourio who is rightfully being called a star.
I like Benge #1, JJ #2 and Fuentes #3 because he deserves a vote* and not voting for Stewart helps out JJ and Benge, one of whom should win.
*Also blatantly a homer pick if I’m being honest.
I think JJ has had the overall better season for the team, but the standout RBI number for Sal is going to get him the hardware. I think it’s hard for even the most stat minded voter to ignore a number like that, but who knows. Both had such awesome years
And let’s not forget McLean!
Or Logan Henderson and his records he set.
Honestly if Logan Henderson had 130 innings I’d consider him for ROTY though I’m a biased Brewers fan who has loved Logan Henderson for years.
Wetherholt is only an elite defender if you believe in OAA / FRV (FRV is OAA with a couple of things added to it), but OAA is by far the least accurate of all the defensive measurements for infielders because of its intense focus on distance traveled by the fielder between contact and the ball being secured.
OAA thinks that Luis Arraez is the tenth best fielder in the major leagues this season because the Giants positioned him much more deeply in 2026, causing him to travel farther to his left or right before fielding the ball. This is basic geometry, as the longer you make the adjacent side, the longer the opposite side becomes. But Arraez is clearly not the tenth best fielder in the major leagues. He did not suddenly go from a consistently terrible defender to one of the best at age twenty nine. His hands and arm are just as bad as they have always been.
Unlike Arraez, who has a -3 DRS, Wetherholt is well above average at +13 DRS, but Brice Turang nearly laps him with an incredible +22 (Turang would be my NL MVP if PCA wasn’t being Willie Mays). Couple that with FanGraphs’ overly punitive approach to positional adjustments on value for first basemen and designated hitters, then you have a genuinely close call for which player is most deserving to win National League Rookie of the Year.
Because it’s neck and neck, the data on base running mentioned in this piece makes me lean slightly toward Wetherholt, but this is a situation where voting for any of the three is justifiable.
I’ve seen you make this claim in particular about Arraez, so I figured I’d start digging around Savant to 1) make sure I understood the available information about their model and 2) slice up his numbers a bit to see what’s up.
As far as part 1, yeah, I had most of it correct in my memory; there wasn’t anything shocking or something I completely forgot.
So then, I went to his specific defensive player page. I thought if this claim about him gaining value was based on him playing deeper, the average depth would show it. Didn’t really see that; his average depth is basically the same it has been the last couple of years. It is deeper than his worst years in Miami.
The larger change appears the angle he’s playing at — he’s generally shaded more up the middle than he has been before, which is logical considering he’s historically been bad going to his right (toward the middle). His directional numbers are much better going to his right now.
So I then wanted to look at whether he’s getting undue value from misclassified balls (IOW, did the Statcast system say a bunch of chances he converted were counted as more difficult). On sub-50% balls, he’s at -3 OAA this year, which is identical to his combined 2022-2025 total. So that’s clearly not it.
I started messing with the out probability sliders. The real change is is in the 85-95% balls. From 2021-2025, he was at 92% plays made on plays averaging a 91% success rate. This year, it’s been 98% made on a similar 91% average. He also is not sandbagging himself on the 95+% balls as much: he had been at 95% made on a 99% average success rate in the years 2021-2025 versus 98%/99% (-1 OAA) this season.
A lot of the difference in value does appear to be coming from making the lower difficulty plays more consistently. I don’t think it’s a systemic failure of the Statcast system, and I really don’t think it’s a “he’s running further to make the same plays” sort of thing. Could there be quirks here helping his numbers? Sure. Is Statcast’s system perfect? No, not at all. But it does seem to be catching a tangible difference — he’s not screwing up as many easy plays as he did before.
I have no idea if that’s a sticky difference or not, but it does seem to be an actual thing.
Yes, it is. Erroneous classifications on what is lower difficulty and higher difficulty are the systemic failure. You see the inverse with Taylor Walls. Tampa Bay, the most analytically inclined organization in baseball, has played a career 71 wRC+ at shortstop for 3724 innings when OAA sees him as one of the worst fielders in baseball at -17.
That score is due to Statcast consistently putting him at the top of the league in estimated success rate. Basically, they’re viewing his chances as ones that any fielder should make and therefore those outs deserve little credit. DRS, on the other hand, says that Walls is the best shortstop by a huge margin at +73, nearly double second place Dansby Swanson’s +40.
Which is more likely, that the Tampa Bay Rays are so clueless that they’re using a terrible hitter who is also a terrible fielder or that OAA is incredibly poor at measuring defensive value?
Along those same lines, which is more likely, that Luis Arraez suddenly became one of the best fielders in baseball at age 29 after being terrible throughout the rest of his career, or that OAA is incredibly poor at measuring defensive value?
Note that Arraez hasn’t actually improved in any measurable way. He has tied his career high in errors. His arm strength is the same. His sprint speed is the same. His lateral agility is the same. The only thing that has changed is where he has been positioned. OAA thinks that he’s become a completely different fielder whereas DRS says that he’s the same guy he’s always been.
OAA is so bad at measuring defensive value for infielders as to be nearly useless.
I think a FG discussion with Tom Tango and John Dewan on fielding statistics would be awesome.
Isn’t 13 DRS better than “well above average”? That’s roughly top 25 across all positions – and that’s in the metric that is least friendly to Wetherholt. If the least friendly metric says “borderline elite” I feel like that suggests a guy is elite, even if you believe in DRS above OAA.
FWIW, your takes have led me to dig more deeply into how OAA and DRS handle defense. I agree that both bWAR and fWAR are off in their positional adjustment. That said, Sal Stewart is middle of the pack amongst first basemen, in both versions of WAR, and has a solid but not spectacular wRC+ of 115, so I think he’s well behind both Benge and JJ. On the other hand, I think both Pete Alonso and Ben Rice should be getting more MVP love (like top 5-ish).
I have this bias toward great right field arms. Roberto Clemente set the standard then Dewey Evans, who was a tremendous player and belongs in the Hall, picked up the flag until Ichiro raised it even higher. It is the only defensive measure I can actually see that does not include some level of subjectivity. Carson Benge also carries that cannon. He got off to such a terrible start that he was quickly tossed out of consideration. I like Wetherholt but, by the narrowest of margins, Benge, once he settled in, has been very good and has done enough to edge past both him and Stewart to get my vote.
Not even a mention of Rumfield (a 1B with slightly more fWAR and a higher wrc+ than Stewart) or McLean (180 innings of 3.5 fWAR) is weird.
Wetherholt is propped up by some dubious defensive metrics and Stewart is a “classic” old school pick. If you think SSS defensive metrics are exaggerating things (particularly the ones anyone’s preferred source of WAR uses) or that positional adjustments are too extreme, you have a legitimate 5 horse race. Each guy has a case for and against.
I hadn’t realized McLean threw 180 innings this year — darn good ones, too. He’s 6th in the NL in K’s, 8th in ERA. He may be the only candidate whose season could unquestionably be placed among the league’s best without needing the caveat … for a rookie.
Especially if we’re mentally nudging down Wetherholt’s WAR due to its heavy reliance on arguably exaggerated defensive metrics.
Nolan McLean did a rather good impression of Logan Webb (a modern update of the sinker-slider archetype), so it’s fitting that like Webb he’s flying somewhat under the radar.
Yeah it was oddly dismissive of Rumfield.
It’s not just fWAR that thinks Rumfield was better. FWIW, bWAR has Rumfield at 3.2 bWAR vs. 2.1 bWAR for Stewart.
And since he mentioned WPA, even though he said he’s not using it – he included it – so let’s just get it stricken from the record entirely, bc any boost one might get from WPA for playing on the Reds or playing 81 games in Colorado, is negated by playing 162 games for the Reds or Colorado. To wit, run differential:
Cardinals -21, 77 expected W, 19 extra inning games
Mets -33, 76 expected W, 18 extra inning games
Reds -160, 62 expected W, 14 extra inning games
Rockies -184, 62 expected W, 10 extra inning games
So it’s a c
RE24 does measure the hand they’re dealt, but it’s not a rate stat, so context does matter. And it doesn’t account for ballpark, which means it also doesn’t account for strength of schedule or opponents ballparks. Baseball Savant has 2026 park factors as:
Coors #2, 108
Great American, #15, 99
Busch, #24, 97
Citi, #25, 97
The Rockies played 51 games vs. the NL West, wheras the Reds played 31, the Cards 32, and the Mets 31. That means more games at Petco and Oracle, #27 and #28 per Baseball Savant. Dodgers are #21 at 98. Even Chase is only a 100 park factor on Savant, so the Rockies certainly give back some of that advantage with their extra games in the NL West parks.
Outside of Citi and Busch, there are only two below average hitters parks in the NL Central and East combined. loanDepot at 97, and American Family Park at 98. So relatively speaking, the Rockies are certainly losing more on the road than the Cardinals or Mets are. It’s a net positive for the Cards and Mets, with Nationals Park (#3, 106), Citizens Bank (#7, 103), Wrigley (#8, 103), and PNC (#5, 104)
Per Baseball Nut – idk the site, it’s just the second Google result for “Park Factors 2026” and is a real site – Petco is at #29 and Oracle at #30. Chase is above average, but LA is below average too, at #22. Citi (#27) is an even worse ballpark to hit in than Busch (#24), and of course CIN is the second best hitters park at a 108 park factor, and CHC, and MIL all are above average ballparks to hit in. I’m not saying that the road parks cancel out the Coors effect, but it’s a 114 park factor. The difference between Coors and Great American is the same as the difference between Great American and American Family Park (102), and the difference between AFP and Petco (94) and Oracle (92) is greater than the difference between Coors and GAB.
All this is to say, there should be no doubt that the Rockies also have to play in the two worst hitters ballparks in the NL, if not all of MLB, more often than the other candidates. I don’t believe RE24 should be introduced into the methodology but then dismissed entirely for the candidate who ranks #1 while being applied, and given significant weight, to the other candidates. It might overrank Rumfield some – or it might not – but it doesn’t overrank him enough for him to fall off the list. And Rumfield’s greatest strength is his OBP, where Coors is a 105 factor on Savant and Busch is a 100. And Rumfield walks 11.4% of the time vs. Wetherholt at 10.5%, or 8.4% more often, which can’t be erased by playing 81 games in a ballpark that inflates walks 5% more. So you can’t really give credit to Wetherholt for an OBP profile and also remove Rumfield from the list for an OBP profile.
And apologies to Mr. Rumfield, but this is already way too many words about something I don’t actually care about. But in regards to the note about bias, IMO, the author does show a bias by excluding Rumfield in an otherwise comprehensive look at the field of candidates for NL ROY.
Great article. I’d pretty easily vote for Wetherholt if given the chance. His blend of good offense (at a difficult position to find it!), elite defense, and good baserunning is incredibly difficult to find. He’s had a very impressive season. Of course, the other candidates have been great as well. But when you combined all aspects of their games, Wetherholt’s got the 15th most fWAR this year in the NL. Benge is 31st, McLean is 38th, and Stewart is 87th.
Interestingly, Wetherholt also has the second highest xwOBA out of NL rookies after Bryce Eldridge (third amongst MLB rookies after McGonigle as well).
I also think there’s a traditional narrative argument for Wetherholt, although I wouldn’t vote off of narrative personally. But the Cardinals have over-performed this season relative to expectations, and JJ is a big part of the reason why. Meanwhile, the Reds and Mets have both underperformed (of course, Stewart/Benge/McLean aren’t to blame for their teams’ poor seasons).
I’m liking Benge after considering it more. Wetherholt was expected to be a 45+ defender at short which translate to a 50+ at second. Has he really been worth 20 runs on defense, or is this a case of the defensive metrics being weird? DRS likes him quite a bit too, so maybe the scouts were wrong about his defense, which does happen plenty, but Benge’s value is more certain being that it’s from better hitting.
I suppose the counterargument is that the gap between Benge and Wetherholt offensively is about 8 runs in favor of Benge, and the gap between them is about 16 runs in favor of Wetherholt. It would take a fairly large discount of defense to equalize the two in value
I guess if he actually led the league in RBI, I could understand how *narrative* could lead voters to choosing him. However, that’s actually unlikely to happen. He’s fallen three behind Burleson with four games to play.
Historically, less valuable players have not generally won the MVP simply for being among the league leaders in RBI. This feels like a strange narrative to lead to him being overwhelmingly favored to win.
This is a really fun and versatile group of rookies in the NL this year! As others have said, McLean deserves some consideration as well, though I’d probably have him 3rd behind Benge and Wetherholt. Stewart has had a nice year too, and honestly I don’t think I’d argue all that much with any ordering of those 4.
Defensive metrics are volatile enough that I tend to round down on players who generate a significant portion of their value from their defense – Wetherholt is clearly a good defender, but average offense with good defense is less interesting and impressive to me than good offense and average defense. Stewart is basically all offense, but I’m not sure he’s actually a better hitter than Benge, who does essentially everything better besides hit home runs. Toss in above average defense and good baserunning and I think he checks all the boxes for me.
Also fun to remember Esmerlyn Valdez’s power binge from the summer, and Eldridge, Rumfield, and Henderson all deserve some recognition for having really good seasons. Throw in Konnor Griffin and NL is in good hands!
Might have to write that script; RE24 does sound like some sci-fi, drug-induced virtual reality! It might even be starting to write itself right now… unless that’s just the AI trying to deceive me…?
Back in the day it was not unusual for a player who was called up mid season to win the Rookie of the Year. I think the love affair with WAR has made that impossible now. It’s sort of like arguing whether peak value (e.g., Koufax) is better than career value/counting stats (e.g., Sutton). I’m a peak guy, I guess, so give me Logan Henderson over all of the candidates discussed. 11-3 for an actual playoff contender, 2.47 ERA, 24 consecutive starts at the beginning of his career with at least 5 IP and less than 3 runs allowed. I’d take that over a year of Steer or Weatherholt or McLean anytime.
Michael Harris II wasn’t called up until May 28 and won ROTY in 2022, and Kurtz didn’t get enough PAs to qualify last year.
The most valuable thing to come out of this discussion for me is the mental gymnastics it takes to avoid just saying it’s Wetherholt because he leads in fWAR.
WAR is supposed to be an all encompassing metric which captures a player’s value totally and fully. The best player in the league should also lead in WAR. So if Wetherholt has the highest WAR among rookies, he’s the ROY.
Most critically, if there are aspects of the game that are not accounted for or incorrectly accounted by WAR, then change WAR? If we need to add situational hitting or run expectancy, then do that? I don’t understand why we would invent a metric to measure something, say that it doesn’t actually measure that thing, and just start trying to fudge in other stuff based on vibes. We have so much data now and so much computing power, we can just fix stuff!
And it’s not like this means that everything has to be fixed or it’s not worth improving the model – undoubtedly we will get new ways of thinking or new things to measure later on (neural processing is probably the next big one), but for one we can backdate new models to recalculate previous outputs, and for another we already have different models of WAR for previous decades when data wasn’t available to the degree it is now.
It seems a little off topic, and definitely it isn’t good for articles if the entire thing is just a link to a sorted leaderboard, but I don’t understand how we can have nuance here. It’s like we’re still arguing over how much a ton weighs (yes this is a deliberate example because of metric and imperial tons) instead of standardizing the kilogram. Wetherholt is the ROY because he leads in WAR, and if he shouldn’t be the ROY (not based on voting but based on value) despite his WAR lead then we should change WAR so he is accurately ranked as not the best rookie.
I agree. Both Baseball Reference and Fangraphs show Wetherholt with a 2+ WAR lead over Stewart. That’s not close. 2 WAR is the difference between a replacement level player and a league average player.
And while there’s some “margin of error” with WAR, if we’re going to argue that the margin of error could potentially be greater than 2 WAR, then WAR itself becomes useless and should be scrapped.
That’s why I made my Luis Arraez argument that everyone is so obviously tired of. The way that fWAR calculates defensive value does need to be scrapped. It should use DRS, not OAA, and the positional adjustments need to be adjusted as well. The penalties for first base and designated hitter are far too high given that the average and replacement levels at those positions have declined so much from what they were when the positional values were initially assigned.
The first half of this article isn’t super important IMO. WPA is a bad stat for individual players. RE24 is nice if you like RBIs but aren’t a fool, but it is definitely not a one size fits all statistic if one of the players is a table setter type and the other isn’t.
The position in the second half of the article is the main story but not all of it. The main story is about both position and stadiums. The reason why Wetherholt’s offense is better than it looks (and Stewart’s is worse than it looks) is because CIN’s home stadium is way more offense friendly than STL’s. And the reason why Wetherholt’s more valuable is because he’s been something like the fifth best 2B this year and Stewart has only been something like the 15th best first baseman. You can make the argument that this is just all WAR by another name, but in how many years would you take the 15th best season by a first baseman over the fifth best second baseman? Probably not many.
“…but in how many years would you take the 15th best season by a first baseman over the fifth best second baseman?”
This reminds me of NL MVP voting in the late 2000s when Ryan Howard consistently did better than Chase Utley. Even setting aside defense and baserunning, Utley hit as well as Howard did from 2007-2009. Yet somehow Howard always did better in MVP voting.
You don’t even need WAR to tell you how stupid that is. They were teammates. They had similar offensive numbers in terms of OBP and SLG. But one’s a 1B and the other’s a 2B. In a situation like that, the 2B is clearly more valuable. But the voters got it wrong year after year after year…
Howard winning the mvp over Beltran in ‘06 still annoys me.
I mean he won it over Pujols, not Beltran
This may be a stupid question, but how much faith y’all have in the precision of park effects leaguewide? I don’t hear anywhere near the widespread skepticism and shade that is thrown at defensive metrics, but the level of difficulty in measuring feels similar.
Park effects play a significant role in wRC+, ERA- and WAR, and I wonder if we aren’t appreciating enough margin for error on that front when citing those stats.
There are definitely major issues with park effects, even within teams where you’ll have situations where pull hitters to one side massively benefit from playing in one park while other guys dont at all
I think Cris Sanchez is particularly well suited to pitching for the Phillies in CBP. That doesnt have to be a bad thing! I’d be quite happy to have him on my team as a Philly fan. Do I think that means he’s been worth 8 WAR the last two years like bref says? Well, not exactly
I’m just utterly baffled by the mental gymnastics and willful ignorance people are deciding to employ to go against Wetherholt. Suddenly RBIs are what we care about again??
Well… as a Reds fan and from someone who respects you
F U