Tom had a good idea to write about Starlin Castro and the question of where he bats in the lineup. It's a topic that drew a wide range of opinions with readers giving a variety of perspectives. We also touched upon different theories of how to put a lineup together and this has inspired me to write a series on optimizing the Cubs lineup. It won't be easy to put together a good opening day lineup, like building the Frankenstein monster or perhaps a car from scraps in a junkyard -- but we do know that help is on the way, so I'll consider both present and future candidates. We'll also look at each spot from an "old" school and "new" school perspective.
So where do we start? With the leadoff position, of course...
Leadoff Man
Old School says: Put your fastest hitter at the top so he can steal bases and immediately get himself into scoring position. That's the top priority and if he has good OBP skills, it's considered a bonus.
New School says: Put your best OBP guy up there -- but not a guy with power. The leadoff man comes up to the plate with a man on base an average of just 36% of the time, lower than the subsequent spots in the order. It's also better, though not essential, to have a guy who can run a little, though not to steal bases because the presumption is that your best group of hitters are coming up next. You don't want to run into outs, but you do want a guy who runs the bases well and could get you an extra base that could lead to that extra run. Lastly, it's logical to put one of your better hitters at or near the top because it means they will have more plate appearances throughout the course of the season.
Opening Day Candidates
David DeJesus: DeJesus has a career .356 OBP, including a .384 mark in 2010. He slipped off a bit in 2011 to .323 but the thought is that last season was an aberration. He also runs well, though he is not a basestealer. Because he isn't a threat to steal, he fits the new school philosophy better than the old school. As it stands, he's the top candidate to lead-off to open the season.
Starlin Castro: Castro's lifetime OBP is .343, which is decent but qualifies as very good with this team. For what it's worth, he had a .370 OBP in the leadoff spot last year, suggesting perhaps that he changed his approach a bit in that spot. He makes up most of his OBP with batting average, so he's not the kind of guy that's going to work counts. He does have the speed that would make an additional asset at the top of the lineup. He may end up getting bigger and replacing some quickness with strength over time. That may not profile best for either school of thought.
Tony Campana: Of the current Cubs, he's the one that fits the old school philosophy best. Campana can flat out fly and is a threat to steal a base whenever he gets on. He was 24 out of 26 in the stolen base category last season. The problem with Campana is when it comes to new school philosophy. He's not a great OBP guy because he probably won't hit for a high average and he doesn't walk a lot. In other words, given a full season, he'll likely make a ton of outs -- and that's not the kind of guy new school thinkers want getting the most PAs on a game to game basis.
Future Candidates:
Brett Jackson: Jackson's future may come as soon as May. He fits the profile well from both perspectives. He's capable of stealing 20-30 bases, had a 14.3% walk rate over two levels and an OBP of .379. The biggest issue with Jackson is that he has a chance to hit 20 or more HRs per season with plenty of extra base hits. That power and RBI potential may be wasted at the top of the lineup.
Zeke DeVoss: Perhaps the fastest player in the system, DeVoss is a good baserunner with good base stealing instincts. He also put up a ridiculous .458 OBP and 19% walk rate, which is ideal for new school thinkers. The rub with DeVoss is a lack of extra base power. Not a necessity for leadoff men but you want to at least be able to have that as a threat so pitchers are afraid to throw strikes, something that I will call the Darwin Barney Syndrome. The question behind DBS is this: "Why risk walking a batter if the worst he is likely to do is hit a single?" If DeVoss doesn't increase his slugging ability to respectable levels, it's likely that his walk rate and OBP will eventually start to dip. Though it has a long way to fall before it's considered a problem. For what it's worth, the Cubs feel DeVoss has the wiry strength to someday hit doubles and triples with more regularity, which should allow him to maintain good OBP number as he rises through the ranks.
Matt Szczur: Szczur ranks with DeVoss in terms of raw speed but is less aggressive on the bases and a less proficient base stealer. That is partly due to his relative inexperience and the Cubs feel those instincts will continue to develop. He's an excellent contact hitter with average power. He showed some discipline early in the season but then tailed off badly upon getting promoted to High Class A Daytona. He'll have to improve both his OBP skills and his base running to be a leadoff man, but the Cubs expect him to develop these skills by the time he makes the majors. If so, he has a chance to be an ideal leadoff man.
Logan Watkins: Watkins suffers from a mild case of DBS as well, although he did raise his slugging pct to above .400 for the first time in his career. If he can maintain that at the major league level, he may have a shot. He is a good athlete who runs well (though, not a basestealer at this point) and, like DeVoss, is deceptively strong, which gives the Cubs hope that he can one day hit with enough sock to keep pitchers honest. He's an aggressive hitter but he is willing to take a walk. He has a lifetime OBP of .368. Over the last two seasons he has averaged about a 10% walk rate with a .350 OBP, both marks are above average but not by a whole lot. He's going to have to work hard to sustain those averages or perhaps even improve on them, if he is to have a shot at both starting at 2B and leading off.
Ronald Torreyes: Torreyes doesn't walk a lot because he has the same kind of issue a lot of Cubs prospects have in that he makes contact so easily that he'll put the ball in play more than most players. His average (.356) alone, however, makes for a good OBP and he managed to muster enough walks to get his on base number up to .398. As a runner, he's average but that's a secondary concern with the new school philosophy. The good thing about Torreyes is that he's not a wild swinger and he has enough punch in his small frame (.457 slugging pct.) to force pitchers to be careful in the strike zone. That may bode for some more walks down the road.
Matt Cerda: A huge longshot because he's a singles hitter and will likely be relegated to a utility position, I mention Cerda because he has the best plate discipline in the system, better even than Jackson. He had a 15.2% walk rate and an OBP of .394 while hitting .283. He's not a basestealer, but he's a good athlete who's an above average runner. Cerda will have to hit for more extra-base power and prove he can handle 2B defensively to have even the smallest chance.
Filed under: Lineup
John...Gr8 start. Thanks for all your efforts on this blog.
Thank you and your welcome. Wanted to post this yesterday but little news items kept popping up!
17 days 21.5 hours and counting....
I still like Starlin in the lead-off spot or 2-hole. I think Tony is going to fill in at the bottom end very nicely. I'm sure Sveum will tinker with the speedy guys a bit in ST. As for BJax when he comes up 3-hole, clean-up or lower?
My guess is Jackson will be lower at first, then work his way up. But we'll cover every spot in the order and Jackson's name will probably come up often in a few spots.
Lots of punch and judy types on this list. I'll say this about DeVoss; if he really is faster than Campana, he'll be able to turn single into doubles with some regularity. That alone should force some pitchers to reconsider grooving him a fastball.
I'm not sure he's faster than Campana but he's up there. He ran a 6.45 40 yrd dash and, like Campana, he knows how to use it. He's naturally stronger than he is and has much better plate discipline, so the hope is he'll get his slugging up there a bit too, same with Watkins.
Of the list, Szczur has the best pop in his bat followed by Torreyes, but neither walk that much. Either someone will have to start taking walks or other guys will have to be more than singles hitters. Right now there's not an ideal solution and it could make Jackson a leadoff guy by default.
I think you probably mean a 6.45 60-yard dash. Running that speed in the 40 would be extremely slow.
I would enjoy seeing Campana leading off this season, but DeJesus makes more sense. But perhaps because of the lack of talent, DeJesus is pushed to more middle of the order for now.
Long term, I love DeVoss, if he's able to figure out 2B defensively. Sczcur is a hard one to place, he's another who I would slot in as a #2 guy, but Castro has to be there. Perhaps would be better to see Sczcur in leadoff with DeVoss 8th, to drive my lineup theory I rambled on about the other day.
Haha! Definitely meant 60 yd dash. I think Fielder might run a 6.45 40 yard dash.
I like DeVoss too. If he can develop any semblance of extra base power, he'd be ideal. I think if you could give his plate discipline to Szczur, you'd really have something. Or Szczur's extra base power to DeVoss...either way works.
What do you think of the idea of putting the pitcher batting 8th and having that 2nd leadoff hitter in the 9th spot?
The issue that makes the pitcher batting 8th look better than it is, is the pure lack of value placed on the 8th hitter. Old school theory (which many managers play to, moreso than the GM's) says that it should be your worst hitter. But how many times do your 6&7 guy string together a couple singles which are wasted.
In the end, you still want to minimize the AB's for the pitcher and put more emphasis on effective plate appearances for your #8.
It would be an interesting analysis to run. Someone with all of the numbers out there should be able to (relatively) easily compare the number of AB's for the #8 vs. #9 hitter, as well as the percent of AB's with RISP for #'s 8,9, and 1.
Glad that got cleared up. I was starting to peg myself as a fast guy and was running hall sprints in preparation for spring training. Okay, back to my desk and computer.
Haha! I hope I didn't kill your dreams of making it as a leadoff hitter with that typo, BTC.
I'm pretty sure Rich Eisen ran a sub-6.5 40 at the combine...in a suit and dress shoes.
Probably! Which reminds me, didn't Dan Patrick and Mark Grace have a race once?
I think that's before my time haha. Didn't start caring about the Cubs til the NLCS incident.
Sorry John,, but I think you have the cart before the horse. It would be impossible to choose a leadoff guy until you know what you have in the 3 hole.
If the 3rd hitter is a high avg. low slg.pct. type,, you need a fast, old school type guy.
If the 3 hitter is a slugger,,, then you take the new school approach.
Most managers, IMO, start with the 3 and 4 guy then fill out both ends of the lineup.
I'm just writing them in order 1-9, but, at any rate, I don't think they're related, Henry. I think you have a decent candidate in DeJesus that does everything you want except steal bases -- which really doesn't fit new school philosophy anyway. I think the Cubs will lean in that new direction and if they also get big time speed out of the equation, they'll take it. But if they have to choose between OBP and SBs, I believe they'll take OBP every time.
I forgot to mention, the one kid I'm really looking forward to seeing develop in the system is Javier Baez.
I'm excited about him too. He should start the year in Peoria. Ideally, he'll fit somewhere in the middle of the lineup.
It's nice to have good choices to choose from. It will take a few
years to have them develop, but it will be nice to follow their
careers
I think that's the key is seeing how these guys develop. None of them are finished products as we can see from the brief descriptions. All of them need to work on something.
Some may wind up being more than a leadoff hitter (i.e. Jackson), while others may not even start or make the majors (i.e. Cerda). It'll be fun to watch.
The problem I have with the Darwin Barney Syndrome theory is that I think HE has Josh Vitters Syndrome. I think he has good pitch recognition, but has lousy plate awareness. I have never seen any player make more first pitch outs when the Cubs were losing in the late innings than Barney in my life.
I figured he either had early dinner reservations or as I said before terrible plate awareness. Why would a pitcher be afraid to walk him, when he knows Barney is going to swing at the first pitchers pitch off the plate. He makes contact, but will meekly ground out and waste an AB. If he would only learn to lay off those pitches, he would be a much more effective hitter.
Leadoff hitter; No. He should be 8th hitter in the order at best. Preferably a bench/utility player in the near future. Unless he becomes a more disciplined hitter.
I thought about putting Barney in the mix only because Sveum mentioned it as a possibility, but I couldn't think of a good argument from either school of thinking as to why they should, so I left him off. Sorry Dale, he just doesn't belong in that spot. He also mentioned Campana, and you could make an old school argument for him, so I went with that one.
I don't know if you saw that study I posted a while back by Josh Weinstein of the Fangraphs/Hard Ball Times, but it showed that Barney didn't really swing at a lot of bad pitches and he was thrown a higher percentage of strikes than almost any position player in baseball.
I saw it, but that is an overall stat that encompasses an entire body of work.
Would Fangraphs allow you to break down stats from the 7th inning and beyond? The approach hitters and pitchers take early in the game is significantly different than later in the game when the Cubs are losing.
It got to the point later in the season that when the Cubs were losing and Barney came up to the plate, you could call it before he stepped into the box. First pitch out. It's not that he would swing at a pitch around the strike zone. He would swing at any pitch that was in the zip code and again waste an AB.
He can't lay off of pitches later in the game. As I said before, lousy plate awareness. It's something the overall stats won't tell you.
Barney's numbers in those stats that Weinstein posted don't tell the deeper story.
Will have to find a more specific stat, it'd be interesting to see if he changed his approach in those situations - especially in the 2nd half where he struggled more in general. We know that Marlon Byrd did something similar- but he also became more hacktastic overall last season. Men on base though and it was rare to see him get more than 3 pitches. Either hit the first ball, struck out on 3 pitches, or somewhere in between, it seems.
Here is a late inning pressure stats page on the Cubs.
http://usat.ly/zXLjnR
Barney's average in the late innings of .244 is 32 points lower than his overall season avg. I would love to break it down even further to P/PA and what his stats were when the Cubs were losing late in the game.
Don't get me wrong. I blame the Hendry regime here more than I blame Barney. The Cubs system never taught patience at the plate and grinding out at bats in the past. I'm looking forward to seeing a more patient approach for hitters coming up through the system in the future.
John, I know your not implying that Barney should be a leadoff hitter, but I think that DeVoss and Watkins would never suffer from DBS.
I sure hope there's a cure for that.
There is...more extra base power! Althought they're both smaller players like Barney, DeVoss and Watkins have more natural strength and a better chance to develop that pop than Barney, imo.
As long as they lay off swinging at bad pitches in the late innings like Barney does, they'll be fine.
No magic pill needed. :)
Against right handers, DeJesus
Against left handers, I'd consider Jeff Baker...
That works too. Baker's not ideal, but considering DeJesus sometimes struggles against lefties, the Cubs may not have a better option there. Are you talking about a platoon with DeJesus or Stewart, or possibly platooning him at 2nd with DeWitt...or all of the above?
Not sure...I guess they want Stewart getting all the at bats at 3B hoping he puts it all together.
DeWitt strangely has a reverse platoon split, hitting MUCH better against lefties than righties.
Maybe Baker at 1B vs lefties with LaHair playing vs righties, but they may also want LaHair getting all those at bats.
It's a clusterF of mediocrity!
Sad, but true! Maybe the best solution could be to use Baker's versatility like the Cubs did early on with DeRosa. Spell each of those guys every so often against lefties and stick him in the lead off when he does play.
Whatever mix works to get the best from each player
I believe nearly everyone on this site realizes that it takes considerable time and effort to do these types of articles but I never think it is bad to again say thanks for what you do. This one was particulrly interesting to me. Like many folks, I check in multiple times each day. All good wishes!
I agree wholeheartedly. It's not only the articles, but the well thought out comments that John makes. Comments aren't written and left to whither. It is quite impressive.
Would any of these guys from our lower minors fit the future as a leadoff hitter?
*Jeimer Candelario (doesn't steal much, but great OBP potential)
*Marco Hernandez - (Steals bases, but doesn't walk much)
*Gioskar Amaya - (same as Hernandez)
*Daniel Vogelbach - Just kidding!
Thanks for those kind words, BTC!
As for those names -- all excellent choices --except for Vogelbach :). I think Hernandez has the best leadoff potential of the 3 but I like all of them better as potential 2-3 hitters. I'm also debating whether to add players that are so far from the majors on to the list. I'll do it for the next installment, though.
Thanks Hubbs, the fact that I have great, sharp readers who appreciate my hard work really makes it worth it!
I also have to agree with Hubbs and BTC. Thanks for a great read, John! Looking forward to the rest of this series, and, well, everything, actually.
Thanks Norway, will get the next one out late tonight (maybe 11-12 pm CDT)
John, to echo the sentiments of all the others on here, thanks for doing a great job! I hit this site up day and night to get all the latest Cubs info.
I also want to thank all the posters in the comments section for keeping the interesting conversations going...you make this site standout from the others because of the intelligent conversation. Keep it up!
Thank you for that, jpp! And no doubt we have some of the most well-informed readers out there. Not everyone has the same opinion, but they call back it up.
Personally, I love speed at the top of the lineup, but only...I repeat only if a) they are high OBP guys, b) they have low power numbers compared to the rest of the team and c) they have a high success rate in stolen bases. Can we all just agree that Soriano was the worst lead-off hitter of all time? I don't even have to elaborate. Anyway, back to speed at the top. Looking at Campana, if he had a good OBP, I wouldn't mind him running with great RBI guys coming up behind him because he could steal at a 92% rate. There would be a much higher percentage of times that he gets on and takes second and now provides multiple chances for a single to score him (and eliminates the double play), than him getting thrown out and taking the bat out of their best hitters' hands. Plus the lead off guy has the pitcher in front of him most of the game so he usually has more opportunities to steal without a guy on. Again, Campana is a bad fit because he can't get on base in the first place. I just wanted to point out that I don't agree with the philosophy that speed is a bad idea at the top of the order. I know I'm looking ahead 7 articles, but I would think he would make the perfect 8 hitter. Let him run all day with the pitcher up there. DeVoss is very intriguing to me, although I haven't seen him play yet. Is he likely bound for Tenn or Iowa?
I think if you can add speed to the equation it is a definite plus, but like you said, OBP has to be the priority. Ideally you'd like the best of both worlds -- though you'd probably steal less with the new school philosophy. But even if you don't steal a lot, speed at the top is an asset. It could mean going from first to 3rd on a single -- or scoring from first on a double. It certainly adds runs to the equation and you can't dismiss the importance of speed and good baserunning.
As for DeVoss, he'll probably start in Peoria but there's a chance he'll be in Daytona by midseason if he succeeds. There's even a small chance he starts in Daytona (high Class A), if he looks advanced this spring He looks to be a guy the Cubs would like to move quickly. Both regimes (Wilkin/McLeod) like DeVoss a lot.
Not to change the subject, but there seems to be some rumors emanating from MLB HQ that Selig may be about to bitch slap the Red Sox in regards to the still unresolved compensation over Epstein. Some unnamed sources, supposedly close to Selig, say Selig isn't feeling very sorry for the Red Sox, because they didn't settle compensation before they allowed the Cubs permission to speak with Epstein, and that Selig feels that once permission was given and Epstein agreed to accept the job as part of a promotion, the Red Sox didn't have a leg to stand on.
Logic and fairness reign!
Even Gammons is now saying Class A player.
Too bad you are using a metaphor, Michael. I would pay good money to see Selig literally slap Lucchiano and give him a public scolding.
John - Quick question not related to this article. I just read in article about how Epstein and Cashman can now make deals with each other since it wasn't really a possibility when Epstein was with Boston. Considering that, the Yankees need a DH. The Cubs may want even more starting pitching depth (not sure how much more). If Cashman came to Epstein and said hey, I know you'll be giving us a better overall player by giving us Soriano for Burnett, but since Burnett is only owed $32m over 2 years and Soriano is owed $54m over 3 years, we can give you a chance to save $22m. Let's make a straight up trade. Should Epstein take it? I mean, the Yankees don't need Burnett anymore with all their pitching depth and the Cubs, as we all know, don't need or want Soriano anymore. Plus the Cubs could just always release Burnett and eat the remainder of the money. No prospect, but a he's a better release candidate than Soriano given the dollars and years left. Maybe Burnett pitches well the first half of 2012 and you can deal him for even more savings and/or prospects at the deadline. Just a thought.
I don't believe the Cubs want to take on another bad contract. If they're going to eat money, they'll just be rid of any of these kinds of players altogether. Unless they save some money from taking on Burnett then release him. If the money is equal, then I think the empty roster space would be more valuable than having to pay Burnett and probably eat his contract later.
Even if there was no other money exchanged? We would save $22m up front. Better than the $9m-12m we all keep hearing about. Makes it alot easier to just release Burnett if we wanted to. Or do you just think the Yankees wouldn't do it?
If there is that kind of money saved then I can see them doing it -- if only to release Burnett and make it cheaper to cut ties or dump him on someone else. If the amount saved is 5-10M, then it's less likely because I think if the Cubs are going to pay that much, then they'd rather dump him for a fringe prospect and get the roster spot.
My problem with this idea, is who do you sit so Burnett can pitch? The 4-5 guys they probably want to assess and see if any of them are part of the future. The top 3 are probably better candidates to do well and be traded than Burnett. And if you're giving up money to get Burnett and release him, you might as well just release Soriano. I don't have a problem with a bad contract swap, but I don't think this particular one brings any value to the Cubs.
That's an excellent point, Kevin.
Zeke DeVoss is probably going to be my minor league player to follow this year. Supposedly it was watching Zeke DeVoss that was the highlight of Ricketts' year. That watching DeVoss opened Ricketts eyes and really confirmed the whole " Build from within" commitment. And that spurred the whole revolution we are currently witnessing. Plus he seems to have all the "tools" and we can see how effective the people Jason McCloud put in the farm system are at refining and molding those skills into a complete player.
Of course the person I followed last year, Rebel Reidling, turned out to be not much. Probably shouldn't pick my players based on their name. Probably a lot of things....
Felzwell/Caldfelzz is probably going into the auto shop for some work. The test run was fun. Lots of Bravado, some hints at intelligence, humor..... But we have to figure out when the situation calls for Caldfelzz and when Felzzwell comes out to play.... I'm thinking Felzzwell for happy thoughts and Caldfelzz for negative....But we got time. Pitchers and catchers report in `17 days which means we don't need to report for a month... And Caldwell and I like to write ourselves into shape. But we're going to be a force. Just you watch.
Is Loxas carrying his share of the water? MmmMMm.....Jury's out.
Anyway, as the man likes to say, It has been written!
The Vulcan mind meld has it's disadvantages. Ever since the Kama Sutra thing, my wife won't leave me alone. There just isn't enough Viagra in the world. Maybe we should try using the force, and keeping to strictly baseball? I'm communing with Yoda now. Maybe he can help?
Felzwell/Caldfelzz has some real upside from what I hear.
I naturally write more than Tom, who has less time than I do. I also used to write huge manuals in my last job as well as do some writing on the side.--- so if I'm not writing, I'm not exactly sure what to with myself. So we should expect many more articles from me in general.
I share your views on DeVoss. He has a combination of athleticism, skill, mental makeup and intelligence that really makes you like his chances. The only things he lacks are extra base power and some refinement on defense, but I think it will come in time. And the D is less of a problem because he can already play a pretty good CF if he has to move. Obviously with Jackson, Szczur, Ha, and Chen, the Cubs don't need a CF as much as they need a 2B, so hopefully he stays there.
Just consider "Great article" the "e" in Carne from now on, John, so I don't have to keep saying it. I'm looking forward to the other installments of this series.
I like the sound of Zeke DeVoss. Good OBP, good basestealer, works the count. I don't buy you don't steal bases with the heart of your lineup coming up for the same reason I don't buy a leadoff hitter's gotta be more than a singles hitter. The % a speedster is on 2nd from a walk or hit plus a steal and the odd double is gonna be more than that same % from a guy with more power but not a basestealing threat. Especially when you factor in that speedsters can turn long singles and bloop singles into doubles. People can gripe, "Hey, he just got thrown out trying to steal with the best rbi guys coming up," but they could also gripe, "Hey, he just grounded out with the best rbi guys coming up!" Part of the game. A good basestealer has a high steal to caught stealing ratio, so you take your chances because you know it's gonna earn you runs in the long term. And the times a speedster doesn't steal because of his jump or the pitcher's move or whatever, he's still more likely to score from first on an extra base hit than the guy with lesser speed.
Thanks Carne! And by the way, your handle makes me laugh. I'm assuming you mean "Carne" as in the Spanish word for meat?
As for SBs, it's not that you should avoid them altogether, but you want to be able to steal on at least 75% of your attempts and probably closer to 80%. Hard to do that if you do it frequently unless you're Ricky Henderson or Tim Raines, but not as difficult when you choose your spots.
The only reason I like a little pop from all my players, regardless of where they bat, is to put at least the threat of an extra base hit on the pitcher's mind to keep them honest. Otherwise what's to stop them from throwing strikes and not walking players if they don't have that fear? I'd like DeVoss to hit for extra base hits so they're forced to be careful, which would lead to more walks which leads to a better OBP, which leads to more runs. That extra punch makes a difference -- as guys like Henderson and Raines were much better players (and walked a lot more) than Vince Coleman, for example.
Ha, I'm glad you like the name. I meant Carne as someone who works state fairs and smells of Aqua Velva and regret. And of course the name as a whole is a play on good old Arne Harris who did all the WGN Cubs games for years and years. Every time Harry laughed at nothing in particular, I always assumed it was Arne pointing out the redeemable qualities of a fine young lady in the crowd.
Vince Coleman is actually who I had in mind when I was thinking about this btw. He was a FORCE in the mid 80. His rookie year, he had 110 sb, only got caught 25 times, had 107 runs and 170 hits and that put his oWAR at... 1.3? That's crazy. Anytime he got on in a close game, you were scared to death. If you were lucky, the inning ended with him only in scoring position. I'm new to sabermetics, but the buttload of math I took in college is sending off warning buzzers telling me the equations are doing something wrong. If I understand it right, they're comparing Coleman's numbers to other left fielders and saying he's a little bit better. But most left fielders are going to be power hitters, so that's comparing apples and oranges. You have to take into account that he was a leadoff hitter. If Vince Coleman's oWAR doesn't compare him to other leadoff hitters, that's just a huge, huge mistake that needs fixing imo.
Now check out that blonde in the third row.
Ha! That works too. Aqua Vela is the cologne of choice among carnival workers.
As for Coleman, he was a real SB threat and a good singles hitter for years, but just not the same level of player as Raines, offensively or defensively. A little extra base power and some extra walks make a big difference, imo.