Why does everyone hate Neifi Perez?

[RynoRules]

Let's be clear OPS is the closest simple calculation to figuring out how many runs a team will score not just OBP. This is where I argue Neifi is not as bad as people think. It is obvious he sucks at OBP but he does do many other things at the league average or better for a shortstop-such as defense, club house, slugging etc.

 

Exactly how is "clubhouse" measured?

 

Last year Neifi was 9th out of 11 qualified SS in OPS.

 

He has a .681 OPS for his career.

 

In short, his OPS sucks.

 

He should not be an every day player and he should not be making 2.5 mill/year.

 

And furthermore, when you do suck that badly, you should sign autographs, dammit. If Derrek Lee or Mark Prior don't want to sign...fine by me. They've earned that right. But scrub replacement level shortstops should sign the G**D*** autograph!

 

:)

 

What's important is that you are not bitter.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

Let's be clear OPS is the closest simple calculation to figuring out how many runs a team will score not just OBP. This is where I argue Neifi is not as bad as people think. It is obvious he sucks at OBP but he does do many other things at the league average or better for a shortstop-such as defense, club house, slugging etc.

 

Exactly how is "clubhouse" measured?

 

Last year Neifi was 9th out of 11 qualified SS in OPS.

 

He has a .681 OPS for his career.

 

In short, his OPS sucks.

 

He should not be an every day player and he should not be making 2.5 mill/year.

 

And furthermore, when you do suck that badly, you should sign autographs, dammit. If Derrek Lee or Mark Prior don't want to sign...fine by me. They've earned that right. But scrub replacement level shortstops should sign the G**D*** autograph!

 

:)

 

What's important is that you are not bitter.

 

Never!

[TB_11]

Let's be clear OPS is the closest simple calculation to figuring out how many runs a team will score not just OBP. This is where I argue Neifi is not as bad as people think. It is obvious he sucks at OBP but he does do many other things at the league average or better for a shortstop-such as defense, club house, slugging etc.

 

Exactly how is "clubhouse" measured?

 

Last year Neifi was 9th out of 11 qualified SS in OPS.

 

He has a .681 OPS for his career.

 

In short, his OPS sucks.

 

He should not be an every day player and he should not be making 2.5 mill/year.

 

And furthermore, when you do suck that badly, you should sign autographs, dammit. If Derrek Lee or Mark Prior don't want to sign...fine by me. They've earned that right. But scrub replacement level shortstops should sign the G**D*** autograph!

 

Reading that post after several heated posts about why Neifi does or doesn't suck literally made me laugh out loud.

[TB_11]

Let me say, I'm not going to knock the guy for getting 2M or 3M a year for getting 500AB. I really would not knock the guy when I look on the same team and see Wood making 11M and Nomar making 8M a year, the year prior.

 

The difference between Wood/Nomar and Neifi is that if the former played up to their potential they would justify those salaries. If Neifi played up to his potential, he should still get paid less than $1M per year. It's easy to say that Wood and Nomar's contracts didn't make sense after the fact.

[frostwyrm]

Given a full season's worth of AB's Neifi will probably cost you about 15-18 runs of offense when compared to an average shortstop.

 

If you put Neifi in front of Derrek Lee he'll cost you way more than 18 runs. Look at Lee's monthly RBI totals from 2005:

 

APR - 28

MAY - 18

JUN - 19

JUL - 18

AUG - 11

SEP - 13

 

Not surprisingly, Lee's one good month of RBI production was Neifi's hot April. In the other 5 months Lee averaged 15.8 RBIs, which is absolutely pathetic considering his other numbers. Neifi's presence cost us way more than 18 runs, and I have never come so close to wishing injury on one of my team's players as I was with Neifi last year.

[USSoccer]

In looking at Bowa, Dunston and AGone I was not as much compairing the 4 of them. I was simply showing the numbers (and ages) and saying the Cubs have not had a steller SS in sometime, so basically Perez was giving us the production we as fans should be used to.

And the 79-win team last year was quite a bit better than most teams that Cubs fans under 100 are used to as well. That doesn't mean we should be content with a losing season, just like we shouldn't have to be content with well-below average players having substantial roles on the team.

 

This is a fantastic point, and really underscores the entire problem. Just because we are "used" to a certain level of production (bad), does not mean we should tolerate it! This is what I cannot understand. Why do some Cub fans in general seem to be willing to tolerate such mediocre players?

 

If Dunston, Bowa, and AGonz were bad, Neifi doesn't get a pass because he is also bad, and we've not had any better recently. It should mean that Cub fans should clamor for a better option.

 

Neifi, again is a 25th man. He is a utility IF. He is not now, never was, and never should be a key regular on a contending team. If he is, it's a mammoth failure on the part of management.

[goonys evil twin]

Given a full season's worth of AB's Neifi will probably cost you about 15-18 runs of offense when compared to an average shortstop.

 

If you put Neifi in front of Derrek Lee he'll cost you way more than 18 runs. Look at Lee's monthly RBI totals from 2005:

 

APR - 28

MAY - 18

JUN - 19

JUL - 18

AUG - 11

SEP - 13

 

Not surprisingly, Lee's one good month of RBI production was Neifi's hot April. In the other 5 months Lee averaged 15.8 RBIs, which is absolutely pathetic considering his other numbers. Neifi's presence cost us way more than 18 runs, and I have never come so close to wishing injury on one of my team's players as I was with Neifi last year.

 

It wasn't just Neifi though, that held down Lee's RBI.

[CubDad4Ever]

Several points. understand one point does not equate another. Asking for a more complete evaluation of players (which was my goal) including nefi, does not equate tolerance of losing or poor management. In reality it supports good management. Any knowlegable person will tell you that one metric does not a player make, even though some (obp) carry strong offensive corralations. The argument i made is based on the premise of me loving the cubs , reading books and websites that are very sabermetically alligned and being a 23 hs and small college football and track coach. The big mistake being made by people who stay narrow in their stat thinking as cited by james is as simple minded as those they make fun of for not using metrics such as on base. I belive a balanced approach is best (stat analysis, scouting , psych profiling and intuition) because human beings still play the game and even though baseball can be evaluated on cummulitve data, it still cannot be predicted perfectly. Situations do affect people differently. I have two friends that played over 10 years in the big leagues , that consintanly reinforce those points with me. That being said my biggest complaint is the fact the cubs , draft has not produced an every day player since 1991 (glanville) and he was not great shakes. That puts the ball in the scouting and develoupments hands . It is critical that stat is improved. Whether the answer is something like drafting college middle infielders (defensive athletes) whose larger sample size metrics predict on base success or better profiling of some sort kicks out that streak The cubs will then be on their way. God Bless Coach L

[treebird]

Several points. understand one point does not equate another. Asking for a more complete evaluation of players (which was my goal) including nefi, does not equate tolerance of losing or poor management. In reality it supports good management. Any knowlegable person will tell you that one metric does not a player make, even though some (obp) carry strong offensive corralations. The argument i made is based on the premise of me loving the cubs , reading books and websites that are very sabermetically alligned and being a 23 hs and small college football and track coach. The big mistake being made by people who stay narrow in their stat thinking as cited by james is as simple minded as those they make fun of for not using metrics such as on base. I belive a balanced approach is best (stat analysis, scouting , psych profiling and intuition) because human beings still play the game and even though baseball can be evaluated on cummulitve data, it still cannot be predicted perfectly. Situations do affect people differently. I have two friends that played over 10 years in the big leagues , that consintanly reinforce those points with me. That being said my biggest complaint is the fact the cubs , draft has not produced an every day player since 1991 (glanville) and he was not great shakes. That puts the ball in the scouting and develoupments hands . It is critical that stat is improved. Whether the answer is something like drafting college middle infielders (defensive athletes) whose larger sample size metrics predict on base success or better profiling of some sort kicks out that streak The cubs will then be on their way. God Bless Coach L

 

paragraphs

[goonys evil twin]

Several points. understand one point does not equate another. Asking for a more complete evaluation of players (which was my goal) including nefi, does not equate tolerance of losing or poor management. In reality it supports good management. Any knowlegable person will tell you that one metric does not a player make, even though some (obp) carry strong offensive corralations. The argument i made is based on the premise of me loving the cubs , reading books and websites that are very sabermetically alligned and being a 23 hs and small college football and track coach. The big mistake being made by people who stay narrow in their stat thinking as cited by james is as simple minded as those they make fun of for not using metrics such as on base. I belive a balanced approach is best (stat analysis, scouting , psych profiling and intuition) because human beings still play the game and even though baseball can be evaluated on cummulitve data, it still cannot be predicted perfectly. Situations do affect people differently. I have two friends that played over 10 years in the big leagues , that consintanly reinforce those points with me. That being said my biggest complaint is the fact the cubs , draft has not produced an every day player since 1991 (glanville) and he was not great shakes. That puts the ball in the scouting and develoupments hands . It is critical that stat is improved. Whether the answer is something like drafting college middle infielders (defensive athletes) whose larger sample size metrics predict on base success or better profiling of some sort kicks out that streak The cubs will then be on their way. God Bless Coach L

 

The problem with the Cubs drafting is they have strictly gone the scouting route, all tools and intangibles, no objective statistical analysis. Of course you need a balanced approach, but a balanced approach still doesn't justify $5m guaranteed for Neifi getting serious playing time.

 

Personally I don't take the opinions of players that seriously. Listenging to guys like Joe Morgan, John Kruk, Rob Dibble and all the rest really shows you how being good at something does not equate to being good at describing how you do it. Despite human beings not being entirely predictable, stats can tell us that Neifi Perez is a terrible option for a regular major league position, we can reasonably predict that he'll make entirely too many outs most of the time.

[CubDad4Ever]

Marty Marion was a poor offensive option , whose defense cornerstoned some excellent cardinal team. You refuse to do what Bill James and others do account for defense and other metrics. The Yankees were a offensive jugguarnaut that could not win it all. Pitching and defense any day of the week . Make the big name starts Prior and Wood accountable . No its easier if disengenuous to blame Nefi and Dusty. I too know and want better rounded starters at shortstop will help the offense. My point is and will be evaluate in broader terms and see us a team that can use many parts . We are not Oakland in terms of Payroll. I am glad Nefi is a back up for us. I dont want him as a starter expect in injury , but think his value lies in his defense and durability if needed. Nomar stunk last year when durability and defense are called into the metric pool .God Bless Coach L

[USSoccer]

Marty Marion was a poor offensive option , whose defense cornerstoned some excellent cardinal team. You refuse to do what Bill James and others do account for defense and other metrics. The Yankees were a offensive jugguarnaut that could not win it all. Pitching and defense any day of the week . Make the big name starts Prior and Wood accountable . No its easier if disengenuous to blame Nefi and Dusty. I too know and want better rounded starters at shortstop will help the offense. My point is and will be evaluate in broader terms and see us a team that can use many parts . We are not Oakland in terms of Payroll. I am glad Nefi is a back up for us. I dont want him as a starter expect in injury , but think his value lies in his defense and durability if needed. Nomar stunk last year when durability and defense are called into the metric pool .God Bless Coach L

 

But the thing you are ignoring is that every single defensive metric has Perez grading out at, at best average. Most have him below average. Add in the fact that every offensive metric (not just OBP) has him between below average and terrible, and you get a picture of a below average baseball player.

 

It's not people picking and choosing stats to support Perez being below average. It's people pointing out that nearly every stat shows Perez to be below average. And despite this level of evidence, everyone here sees that his best possible value lies in being the 25th man, which allows for him to use his "good teamate/clubhouse guy" skills without his poor baseball skills hurting the team.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Repost:

 

Neifi's defense is above average, but his terrible offense neutralizes that, and in accordance with his age he is entirely replaceable, and most certainly not someone you give 2/5 to with Dusty as manager.

[USSoccer]

Repost:

 

Neifi's defense is above average, but his terrible offense neutralizes that, and in accordance with his age he is entirely replaceable, and most certainly not someone you give 2/5 to with Dusty as manager.

 

BK seemed to think that the metrics suggested he wasnt that great.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Repost:

 

Neifi's defense is above average, but his terrible offense neutralizes that, and in accordance with his age he is entirely replaceable, and most certainly not someone you give 2/5 to with Dusty as manager.

 

BK seemed to think that the metrics suggested he wasnt that great.

 

BP's metrics indicate he's easily above average. While I'm not going to cling to BP's fielding metrics as gospel, I probably won't spearhead an argument either way.

[USSoccer]

Repost:

 

Neifi's defense is above average, but his terrible offense neutralizes that, and in accordance with his age he is entirely replaceable, and most certainly not someone you give 2/5 to with Dusty as manager.

 

BK seemed to think that the metrics suggested he wasnt that great.

 

BP's metrics indicate he's easily above average. While I'm not going to cling to BP's fielding metrics as gospel, I probably won't spearhead an argument either way.

 

Fair enough, Hobbes :D

 

I still will keep my opinion that Neifi isn't a gold glove SS. He's a serviceable utility IF, a 25th man. He's nothing more than that.

[Guest]

Repost:

 

Neifi's defense is above average, but his terrible offense neutralizes that, and in accordance with his age he is entirely replaceable, and most certainly not someone you give 2/5 to with Dusty as manager.

 

BK seemed to think that the metrics suggested he wasnt that great.

For the most part they don't, but defensive metrics are notoriously dicey. Those based on the tradtional box score numbers (errors, assists, and putouts) are extremely nebulous. Those based on PBP data such as UZR are better, but the problem with those are that they depend on proprietary (and expensive) data. For the most part I'd have no problem conceding that Neifi was an above-average defender. I just agree with TT that whatever small benefit his glove provides is far overshadowed by his black-hole bat.

[Guest]

Repost:

 

Neifi's defense is above average, but his terrible offense neutralizes that, and in accordance with his age he is entirely replaceable, and most certainly not someone you give 2/5 to with Dusty as manager.

 

BK seemed to think that the metrics suggested he wasnt that great.

 

BP's metrics indicate he's easily above average. While I'm not going to cling to BP's fielding metrics as gospel, I probably won't spearhead an argument either way.

Any idea how BP calculates those numbers? I can't find an explanation anywere on their site. If FRAA isn't based on PBP data then I wouldn't hold a lot of confidence into its accuracy.

[frostwyrm]

I don't pay much attention to defensive metrics. As much as I dislike Neifi overall, I have never been unwilling to admit that his defense is very good.

[Andy]

It seems ridiculously odd to me that not only was Neifi Perez getting pumped for the All-Star SS job just 6 months ago, but I was able to say "Neifi wouldn't be a bad choice" with a straight face.

[RockTheIvy]

I think Neifi! could have a spot on this team. Remember how the BoSox used Pokey!? As a late inning sub for either Cabrera or Bellhorn. But as has been said a billion times, Dusty won't let him "fall" to that roll. He should not be used, ever, as a pitch hitter (okay okay, if Macias is on your team, then maybe) and should rarely start, and if he does he should bat 8th (9th if Carlos is pitching). The real problem is Dusty.

[SanJoseCubsFan]

I had a hunch that teams went defense first at this position and wanted to check. I just looked at the last 30 years of teams making the World Series and came up with some interesting numbers.

 

Neifi had a higher OPS than 48% of the World Series shortstops (12 in the AL and 17 in the NL). This does not indicate he sucks or doesn't suck. It just means you CAN win with a SS that is a defensive player first. No one will argue he shouldn't be at the top of the line up but you can and most teams did play and win with a shortstop worse than Neifi. BTW the SS that are above him are HOFs-Jeter, Ripkin, Yount (sub HOF). I think this show defense is critical to this position. 5 of the NL teams had OPS under .610 for shortstop. I can attach the backup spreadsheet if anyone wants it.

 

Also, the Cubs OPS offense was better than 68% of the teams in the WS the last 30 years.

 

OPS is the #1 simple predicter of runs scored. In the post steroid era I think numbers will come down.

 

 

At the end of the day our offense may not be as bad as many think and again, pitching will take the team to the playoffs or they won't. It is more on them than anything else.

 

 

 

 

Marty Marion was a poor offensive option , whose defense cornerstoned some excellent cardinal team. You refuse to do what Bill James and others do account for defense and other metrics. The Yankees were a offensive jugguarnaut that could not win it all. Pitching and defense any day of the week . Make the big name starts Prior and Wood accountable . No its easier if disengenuous to blame Nefi and Dusty. I too know and want better rounded starters at shortstop will help the offense. My point is and will be evaluate in broader terms and see us a team that can use many parts . We are not Oakland in terms of Payroll. I am glad Nefi is a back up for us. I dont want him as a starter expect in injury , but think his value lies in his defense and durability if needed. Nomar stunk last year when durability and defense are called into the metric pool .God Bless Coach L

 

But the thing you are ignoring is that every single defensive metric has Perez grading out at, at best average. Most have him below average. Add in the fact that every offensive metric (not just OBP) has him between below average and terrible, and you get a picture of a below average baseball player.

 

It's not people picking and choosing stats to support Perez being below average. It's people pointing out that nearly every stat shows Perez to be below average. And despite this level of evidence, everyone here sees that his best possible value lies in being the 25th man, which allows for him to use his "good teamate/clubhouse guy" skills without his poor baseball skills hurting the team.

[stitchface]

the point of all this is not what teams winning the WS would do or even whether the cubs can win with neifi at SS. the point is that the cubs could get exactly what neifi provides for the league minimum or near it. ie therior, fontenot, cedeno could all fill these roles for much less. so no, neifi is not a good 25th man. he is not just misused, he shouldn't be occupying a roster spot. with cedeno at ss, the only real spot for him is as defensive replacement for walker. if cedeno gets hurt, you won't do much worse raiding the minors as playing neifi everyday. so why spend 2.5 million to keep him around? That 2.5 could be the difference between rusch or weaver every fifth day.

[stitchface]

At the end of the day our offense may not be as bad as many think and again, pitching will take the team to the playoffs or they won't. It is more on them than anything else.

 

While this is true, the point is it doesn't have to be. while there wasn't much hope of improving the offense at SS (at least once furcal signed), this team could have been improved offensively to be less reliant on pitching. Pitching is far less reliable than hitting as pitchers are more likely to get hurt and because pitcher's performances tend to vary more from year to year. at the end of the day though, you just need to score more than your opponents and this should be how you evaluate roster moves.

 

and moneyball was not about obp or how runs are scored. read the book.

[SanJoseCubsFan]

First, good pitching always beats good hitting and I have read Money Ball and many other baseball books. I was talking about OPS not OBS and I was not talking about the book. I was saying that OPS is the closest simple calculation to predict how many runs a team is going to score. It has as 96% regression correlation, do the math in Mini Tab or check our Hardball Times article. The point is, our offense, in OPS terms is good or better than many World Series teams the last 30 years.

 

At the end of the day our offense may not be as bad as many think and again, pitching will take the team to the playoffs or they won't. It is more on them than anything else.

 

While this is true, the point is it doesn't have to be. while there wasn't much hope of improving the offense at SS (at least once furcal signed), this team could have been improved offensively to be less reliant on pitching. Pitching is far less reliable than hitting as pitchers are more likely to get hurt and because pitcher's performances tend to vary more from year to year. at the end of the day though, you just need to score more than your opponents and this should be how you evaluate roster moves.

 

and moneyball was not about obp or how runs are scored. read the book.