Baseball writers continue to grapple with the "v" word.

Why is it so important for so many people to ignore baseball statistics as they try to determine the value of a baseball player?

This is a debate about the relative value of Derek Jeter and Jose Reyes and the numbers are right there on the page -- and the debaters still insist on ignoring the numbers:

"The essence of Derek Jeter's greatness has never had anything to do with whether he has better 'tools' than all those more 'talented' players on those other 29 teams."

Derek Jeter has been a five-tool world-class athlete for ten years.

His power doesn't quite qualify? Not enough homeruns? Okay, perhaps. He still has 350 career doubles, 50 career triples, 180 career homeruns, and a .463 career slugging percentage. He's not exactly Frank Robinson in the power department, but he's not exactly Gary Disarcina, either.

The essence of Derek Jeter's greatness as a baseball player is pure baseball-playing talent.


"And it has never had anything to do with almost all the stuff his critics bring up -- not his Zone Rating or his OPS or his VORP or anything else."

In 2006, Jeter is #2 in the entire American League in VORP. Hafner is #1, Jeter is #2.

Jeter's OPS is .897. This is 17th in the league, which is good on its own merits, but it's first among all shortstops in the league (with Tejada nipping at his heels).

Jeter's Zone Rating? His Zone Rating is .809. Yeah, that's pretty bad. Jose Reyes has a Zone Rating of .857.

Don't be afraid of statistics. Statistics can be your friend. You could have used those three statistics that his "critics" supposedly bring up and you could have proven Jeter's what? His value.


"So who cares if Jose Reyes is faster, or scores more runs, or inspires more pickoff throws? If I'm trying to win the World Series, I'll take Jeter over any shortstop in baseball."

If Reyes's 60 stolen bases throw a pitcher off his game and throw the defense into complete mayhem, then Jeter's 30 stolen bases at least throw the defense into entropic dissonance.


"Jose Reyes' impact on a game transcends conventional measures."

Sigh.

Silly me.

I was gauging his value by runs scored, runs batted in, batting average, on-base percentage, slugging percetange, singles, doubles, triples, and homeruns.


"It shows in the way opposing pitchers speed their deliveries, infielders rush their throws, and Paul Lo Duca -- the Mets' No. 2 hitter -- sees lots and lots of fastballs."
Okay, dude. You win.


"It's manifested in his 63 stolen bases" (conventional measure.) "66 extra-base hits" (conventional measure.) "he's batting .406 with runners in scoring position and two outs" (conventional measure.)


You know what? I haven't learned anything new from these clowns.

Let me figure out who's more valuable:

Jeter: .341/.414/.483, 14 hrs, 114 runs, 96 rbis.

Reyes: .301/.353/.491, 19 hrs, 120 runs, 80 rbis.

I say Jeter. The 60-point edge in on-base percentage gives Jeter the nod.