The 5.5 Hole

It's easy to breakdown the top players in the league, but what about the little guys (or larger than life guys who are currently struggling)? What about the forgotten few bringing up the rear in offensive categories? Those are the players we'll take a look out in this article. It's time to give a little love to the bottom rung.

The Sliver Slugger Award (Player with the smallest sliver of a batting average)
Adam Dunn - .165
After posting a .260/.356/.536 triple-slash last season, Adam Dunn forgot how to hit. He has exactly 60 hits in 363 at-bats. He will finish the season (hopefully) with more than 60 hits, but the only other time he has had this few knocks came in his rookie season. In 244 at-bats, Dunn had 64 hits. He still posted a .262/.371/.578. This season, though, he's striking out more than ever. His 35.5% K Rate is the highest of his career.

Dunn is having one of the all-time bad seasons. A player known for his power and slugging percentage is barely hovering over a .290 slugging percentage. So we take our hats off to Adam Dunn and award him the Sliver Slugger Award.

The Triple Sombrero (Player with the most strikeouts)
Drew Stubbs - 170
If the silver sombrero is bad, and the golden sombrero is worse, and the platinum sombrero is downright embarrassing, the combination of all three must be reserved for season worsts. With only 41 more strikeouts to go, Stubbs is almost a lock to break Mark Reynolds all-time strikeout record. Through 129 games, Stubbs is averaging 3.9 at-bats per game. With 33 games to play, Stubbs will likely get about 128 more at-bats. With a K% of about 33%, Stubbs has a chance to strikeout 42 more times and set the all-time record.

At least Stubbs, unlike Adam Dunn, can boast a positive WAR. He currently sits on a 2.8 WAR. And while Stubbs strikes out a lot, he also gets hits. He has 126 hits. This is keeping him well above the Sliver Slugger Award. But, he has a tight grasp on the Triple Sombrero.

The Non-Base Percentage Award (Player with the lowest on-base percentage, minimum 300 at-bats)
Vernon Wells - .242
Wells has largely been a bust since coming to the Angels from the Blue Jays. But it may not be a complete reduction in talent. Wells' BABIP is a terribly low .211. That means either Wells is incredibly unlucky when he makes contact or fielders are incredible lucky. With a ground ball percentage fourth lowest in his career, it doesn't look like he is hitting the ball right at infielders. It would appear his fly ball hits are just dropping into fielders gloves more often than usual.

Vernon Wells isn't let completely off the hook though. In analyzing his walks, Wells is on pace to take less walks than he ever has in his career. With only 17 walks this season, it would seem Wells is hacking at every pitch he sees. Clearly this contributes to the types of pitches he hits and the chance for making outs. So, Vernon Wells, with his lack of walks, lack of hits, and sheer inability to get on base wins the Non-Base Percentage Award.

The Ducksnorts Award (Player with the least amount of home runs, minimum 300 at-bats)
Jamey Carroll - 0 Home Runs, 378 at-bats
In basically a full season's worth of games, Carroll has been unable to run into one. Carroll is one of only a few players in the league with over 300 at-bats without a home run. If pitchers can hit them, Carroll should have at least one.

Jamey Carroll does contribute elsewhere, though. He has a .291 batting average and a .360 on-base percentage. He's scored 42 runs and boasts a 1.5 WAR. Not great but at least he's contributing. Though Carroll isn't one to hit the big fly, he collects hits any way he can. As his reward, he wins the Ducksnorts Award.

There you have it. We've covered just a few of the offensive categories out there, but we have a good representation of the best of the worst. Great players are easy to evaluate. It's the mediocre to bad players that are fun to analyze. So enjoy the first annual Best of the Worst.

As the pages fall off the calendar and teams ready themselves for the postseason, conversations about the MVP races will quickly heat up. Already, discussions are being launched and debates are taking shape. One of the key debates that will likely get a lot of coverage is that of a pitcher receiving the MVP award.

There's really no question that Justin Verlander and Roy Halladay are the best pitchers in the game, maybe even the best players. But they won't receive serious MVP consideration. A starting pitcher has not received an MVP award since 1986.

And this is for good reason.

Proponents of pitchers receiving the MVP will point to the overall dominance and stats of pitchers like Verlander and Halladay. Advanced metrics will show Halladay leading all of the National League in WAR and they will show Verlander fourth in the American League. I'm a big fan of advanced metrics, but like any other statistic, they have flaws.

For example, WAR is best viewed in comparison with players of the same position. Fangraphs even points out the need for positional adjustments when reviewing WAR. Pitchers have different responsibilities than fielders. Whether you feel that makes them more valuable or less is up to you, just remember that WAR is difficult to apply across all positions accurately. Pitchers play every fifth day where position players play everyday. There is more of an everyday value added for position players.

This argument is not to say pitchers don't play an integral role in success. The argument is simply that MVP awards are better designed for position players.

I'm going to bring up an old argument, but hopefully I'll shed new light on it. The best pitcher is awarded the Cy Young each year based on voter opinions. What award do batters have that only applies to them? The Silver Slugger (the batting average title). But the problem with this award is in it's value. It awards based on batting average only. A player may finish with the highest on-base percentage and lose out on the Silver Slugger to someone with a higher batting average. The point is, the Silver Slugger does not reward the best position player. It rewards the player who gets the most hits as a ratio of at-bats.

So if pitchers have the Cy Young and, for the sake of this argument, we've determined position players do not have a best all around player award, there are really only two solutions. Give the MVP to a position player as the trend has been, or create a new award just for position players and open the MVP voting up to everyone. Theoretically, the MVP voting is already open to everyone, but the fact that pitchers have the Cy Young award is always in the back of voters minds. By creating a separate award for the best all-around position player, voters would be freed and able to objectively determine an MVP, even if that player is a pitcher.

Unless that happens though, the MVP should go to the best position player and the Cy Young to the best pitcher.

How much do runs actually matter?  You've heard over and over again about the American League Central.  Only one team has a positive run differential (scoring more runs on the season than their opponents).  Scoring runs clearly create wins, but how much does the amount of runs actually matter?  Taking the run differential totals, I re-ranked the teams in each division.  Some results are to be expected, but some are surprising.

First the American League:

A.L. East:
NY Yankees +185
Boston +157
Tampa Bay +51
Toronto +22
Baltimore -135

A.L. Central:
Detroit +4
Chicago White Sox -17
Cleveland -18
Kansas City -65
Minnesota -137

A.L. West:
Texas +101
Los Angeles Angels +24
Oakland -21
Seattle -70

Not many surprises here.  The Twins would actually rank lower than the Royals if run differential determined standings.  Yet, the Twins with their -137 actually sit 2.5 games better in the standings than the Royals. While the White Sox are a 1/2 game back of the Indians for second place in the A.L. Central, their run differentials would put them slightly ahead and in second place.  The A.L. East and West match up exactly with the standings.  

Now for the National League:

N.L. East:
Philadelphia +158
Atlanta +70
NY Mets -21
Washington -27
Florida -79

N.L. Central:
Milwaukee +54
Cincinnati +44
St. Louis +36
Pittsburgh -46
Chicago Cubs -101
Houston -158

N.L. West:
Arizona +9
San Diego +5
Colorado 0
Los Angeles Dodgers -9
San Francisco -15

There's a little bit more of a shake up in the National League.  Washington, while ahead of the Mets by a game and a half in the standings, would actually rank behind the Mets using this method.  Cincinnati, 3 games behind St. Louis for second in the Central, is actually better by 8 runs in differential.  Then there's the West.  See anything strange?  First, the defending World Series Champions rank dead last.  Second, the San Diego Padres, currently planted firmly in the cellar, rank second.  Interestingly, the West is also the only division on baseball to have no teams with a run differential of -50 or less.  The lowest total is -15. 

What does this all mean?  It means that runs are important, but not the only ingredient for success.  If standings were based on total runs for the season, or how well teams outscore their opponents, this would be a different conversation altogether.  If that were the case, we'd be talking about the Padres challenging the Diamondbacks for the N.L. West crown.  We'd be talking about the Angels barely hanging on. 

But in the end, runs don't matter as much as wins.