Brandon Phillips Might be Having the Worst Offensive Season of His Career

We've heard this argument countless times before.

Traditional stat guy says, "RBIs are good! ... Run production! ... Clutch hitting! ... No fear!"

Advanced stat guy counters, "RBIs are pointless! ... A product of teammates getting on base! ... Clutch hitting is a myth!"

Both guys win the argument in their own minds, but in reality, nobody wins. Progress takes another punch to the gut, begging its captors for mercy.

This argument has popped up again this season because of Brandon Phillips, who has a career-high 99 RBIs (fifth in the majors) through Tuesday, Sept. 3 while the rest of his numbers have been mediocre, at best. Phillips yelled at a Reds reporter last week, apparently because the reporter, C. Trent Rosecrans, sent out a tweet criticizing the Reds for putting Phillips and his low OBP in the second spot of the batting order. Phillips' tirade was music to the ears of traditional stat backers who think it's ridiculous to criticize a player who's driven in that many runs. Rosecrans was providing a similar melodic tune to the ears of sabermetric folk, who disregard RBIs and think Phillips is overrated because of that stat.

The truth is, Phillips hasn't simply been overrated. In his eight full seasons in the major leagues, this season might be the worst one he's ever had from the plate.

The traditional stat crowd is obviously going to point to Phillips' high number of RBIs and hold that stance firmly. What's interesting about Phillips, though, is that his RBI total is probably the only batting statistic any baseball fan would say has been good this year.

Look at his other more traditional numbers in 2013 (through Tuesday): .267 batting average, 17 home runs, four stolen bases, 72 runs scored. To put those in context, compare them to his stats from the seven other full seasons in his career.

Besides his .261 average in 2008, Phillips has hit at least .275 since 2006 (his first full season).

His 17 HR total is actually right in line with his per season rate, so it would be unfair to say he's fallen off in that category. That said, unless he hits a bunch of dingers in these final 23 games, his HR total compared to the rest of the league will be nothing more than pedestrian. And that's before you factor in the ballpark he plays in, which is a holy land for power hitters.

It isn't surprising to see that Phillips' stolen base numbers have gone down the past four seasons, considering he's an aging player in his 30s, but he still averaged 15 steals in the three seasons leading up to this one. Unless he channels his inner Billy Hamilton these next few weeks, people will look at Phillips' steals total and think, "Man, he's lost a ton of speed."

His runs scored figure will probably increase by the end of the season, so we shouldn't judge Phillips in that category just yet. But it's going to be hard for him to score if he doesn't get on base*. As Rosecrans noted, Phillips isn't so hot in the OBP department (.316 through Tuesday), but like most of Phillips' numbers this year, his OBP has been even worse than it's typically looked during his career. The only time he's had an OBP below .321 with the Reds other than this season was in 2008.

*By the way, can we stop lumping OBP in with other sabermetrics? Just because Billy Beane and Peter Brand Paul DePodesta valued it in Moneyball doesn't mean it's some advanced stat for loser nerds. It's literally just batting average with walks and hit by pitches included. This isn't an advanced concept.

Phillips has upped his BB% from last year, but at 5.8%, he's still well below average in that area. He's rarely -- if ever -- been an elite hitter, but he's usually performed better than this with the bat. Phillips hasn't put up a wRC+ this low since 2008, either, nor has he struck out as much since then (2008 wasn't his best offensive year, to say the least). He's never had a lower slugging percentage or wOBA during any season with Cincinnati, and his ISO is dangerously close to hitting that "lowest ever" mark.

Whether you like those numbers or more traditional ones, it's hard to find a full season in Phillips' career that's been worse than this one...

... unless you look at his RBIs. Anyone who's read or listened to a sabermetric-minded baseball journalist has probably heard them say something along these lines (like the fake advanced stat guy at the beginning of this piece): "A batter's RBIs are a product of runners getting on base in front of him." It's true. If every batter in baseball history came up to the plate without ever having teammates on base, the all-time single-season RBI leader would be Barry Bonds with 73. Baserunners are as vital to a hitter's RBI total as his bat. If you think performing well with runners in scoring position is a skill certain players like Phillips possess that others don't, you should read this. If you're still not sold, well, you're probably not reading at this point, anyway.

But regarding Phillips, specifically, let's investigate the his runners on base situation this season. Among all of his plate appearances in 2013, 438 runners have been on base for Cincinnati. Since 2006, he's only inherited more baserunners in a season twice -- 461 baserunners in 2007 and 449 in 2009. He has more than a good chance to surpass those numbers this year, especially considering Shin-Soo Choo (.415 OBP) is batting in front of him. His RBI totals in 2007 and 2009, by the way, were 94 and 98, respectively. Those, along with his 99 this year, are by far the highest in his career. Have I mentioned how much baserunners affect RBIs?

Of the 438 baserunners Phillips has inherited, 85 have scored (to be clear, not all those runs have counted as Phillips RBIs). That's also a career-high. His batting average with runners in scoring position this season is currently .349, which is near the top of league. So maybe he hasn't been great in all situations this year, but in the situations that have mattered most, he's delivered. That sentence is 100 percent factual. He's performed much better in run-producing scenarios. But that doesn't mean Phillips has a discernible skill when he comes to the plate with runners on second or third.

Here are his BA with RISP figures from every season since 2006 (his overall batting averages are in parentheses):

2006 -- .297 (.276)
2007 -- .269 (.288)
2008 -- .261 (.261)
2009 -- .291 (.276)
2010 -- .246 (.275)
2011 -- .311 (.300)
2012 -- .305 (.281)
2013 -- .349 (.269)

You could construct a narrative saying Phillips has become more clutch since 2011 because he's hit over .300 with runners in scoring position each of those seasons. I mean, it's your story. Who am I to stop you from writing it?

You could also look at eight years of evidence illustrating that Phillips hasn't consistently performed better or worse in clutch situations than he has overall (another thing: notice that he hit .269 and .291 in his 94- and 98-RBI seasons; say it with me: RBIs are a product of runners getting on base).

The last three seasons do make it seem like he's become more skilled with runners in scoring position, and maybe he has. There's a decent chance not even his teammates or coaches know if he's changed his mechanics and/or mindset in ways that have helped him perform better in those situations. If he keeps improving for years to come, this "clutch" debate surrounding Phillips will even make people like me rethink my stance. At the moment, though, his 2013 RISP average simply looks like an outlier in an otherwise normal major-league career.

Phillips has also had just 163 plate appearances with RISP, good for less than 30% of his overall plate appearances. First of all, that's a small sample size, but it also illustrates just how much Phillips has hurt his team. Sure, getting hits that drive in runs is extremely valuable, but if you're making outs during the majority of your other PAs, you're not giving your teammates chances to drive you in, thus preventing runs from scoring. In other words, for every run Phillips drives in, he's taking just as many potential runs off the board by failing to get on base. Again, this isn't an advanced concept. You need baserunners to score runs.

Phillips is by no means a bum. He's still a plus defender at a position where defense is critical and offense can be scarce. His numbers are actually better than they look simply because he plays second base.

Unfortunately, though, none of that masks the fact that Phillips is having a bad season at the plate. He's not getting on base, he's an average baserunner, he doesn't hit for much power, and he strikes out too much. He's not getting any younger, either. This might be his worst offensive season ever, but it hasn't been too far below his other seasons, so this might not be a fluky season, either. It's entirely possible he reached his peak in 2011 and he's starting to steadily decline. That might seem sad to some people, but baseball aging curves aren't very sympathetic.

Still, if Phillips' career ended today, he could look back on it as an overall success. 2013 would just be a down year in an otherwise healthy baseball life. Unless he finishes on a hitting rampage, that's how people should view this season. He might've set a career-high in RBIs, but that doesn't change the fact that he hasn't been very good. Without guys like Choo and Joey Votto constantly getting on base in front of him, everybody would realize how much Phillips has struggled. Given how bad his other numbers have been, everybody should realize this, anyway.

Sabermetrics and the Importance of Youth

It’s no secret that people’s opinions as adults are shaped by events during their youth. Whether we’re talking about politics, social issues, entertainment, or baseball, there are many people who believe everything they believe right now because of how they grew up.

In regards to baseball, this is a big reason (maybe the biggest) why so many people disregard the sabermetric point of view. Sure, advanced stats are a little more complicated than pitcher wins or home runs, but if these people grew up during the 21st century reading articles from writers like Rob Neyer instead of writers like Mitch Albom, it’s hard to imagine their views would still be so old-school. They weren’t brainwashed, they just fallaciously trusted the most visible authority figures, and no one else was really providing more accurate viewpoints. At a certain point, the windows for a new way of looking at baseball were slammed shut. Their minds had been made up, and nothing was going to change them. Some people, like Peter Gammons, kept an open mind and eventually embraced sabermetrics, but he’s the exception to most baseball consumers.

ESPN’s Keith Law talked about this concept on his podcast last week, and he’s mentioned it before that. He says that people should question the opinions spouted from the mouths of talking heads and from the fingertips of writers, even saying that he should be scrutinized. He’s absolutely right, but he probably knows as well as anyone that many people are going to keep valuing extremely flawed, outdated stats and utter things like “grit,” “clutch hitting,” and “the will to win” no matter how many columns Law and other sabermetrically-minded people write.

Baseball fans are more than aware of last year’s AL MVP race between Miguel Cabrera and Mike Trout and are probably tired of hearing about it at this point. The arguments between old-school (pro-Cabrera) and new-school (pro-Trout) baseball consumers became so loud and constant that it made sense for people to make WAR puns. It truly was a war, maybe the biggest one the baseball world has ever seen between traditional stat backers and traditional stat detractors.

But the most interesting part about this debate had nothing to do with those two schools of thought. The people in the middle – who had a hard time deciding which player deserved MVP the most – had the most compelling POVs.

Jim Caple wrote an excellent piece breaking down his thought process in what was an extremely difficult award to vote for. He kept going back-and-forth before eventually deciding on Trout, but he still wasn’t sure he made the right choice. Caple also thought the outrage from the louder sides of the debate was ridiculous. This was a refreshing viewpoint on an issue that felt about as refreshing as a crowded bus during a summer day in St. Louis.

Caple seemed to be struggling between the completely logical Trout side of the argument and the more traditional Cabrera side. I don’t know Caple, but I’m willing to bet he grew up constantly hearing things like “RBIs are extremely important” or “a player who gets his team to the playoffs is more valuable than one who doesn’t.” Maybe Caple’s struggles stemmed from the fact that he couldn’t let go of these ideals he grew up hearing and (likely) accepting.

This brings up one of the more interesting examples from the whole debate: Bill Simmons and his buddy JackO on the BS Report this past October.

Here’s JackO’s opinion on the MVP race:

“I think Trout is the better overall player given he can steal bases and play defense,” he said, “but I just think if a guy wins the freaking Triple Crown he’s gotta be the MVP.”

Again, someone sees the arguments from the sabermetric side but has a hard time looking past that shiny Triple Crown. In JackO’s case, he couldn’t look past the Triple Crown at all. Neither could Simmons.

(Related note: Right after JackO made that comment above, Simmons sarcastically said, "But, Johnny, runs batted in don't matter! It's an arbitrary stat!" He was making fun of the advanced stats defenders, and the way he said it sounded a lot like a jock making fun of a nerd in high school. A few minutes later in the podcast, Simmons referred to himself as a "secret stat nerd." I'm a pretty big Simmons fan, but this section of the podcast was not one of his best moments.)

JackO and Simmons made a couple of other points in favor of Cabrera: Cabrera’s team made the playoffs (without mentioning that Trout’s team won more games), and Cabrera “put the team on his back” the last three months (without crediting Trout for playing nearly as well in that span, especially when considering his defense and baserunning advantages).

The whole conversation consisted of "Trout was amazing, but..." arguments. JackO and Simmons both realized how great Trout was and understood the logic from the pro-Trout side, but old-school baseball viewpoints kept clouding their thoughts. They were like cigarette addicts, unable to get over their terrible habit because they've been smoking their whole lives. No number of studies proving their habit was bad for them could ever completely convince them to make a change.

This old way of looking at baseball will surely become endangered -- if not extinct -- in the next few generations. The fact that last year's MVP debate was so heated is actually a step forward for the sabermetric community even though "their guy" didn't win. Still, while some may want to change the opinions of every traditionally-minded person, that's just not going to happen. Hell, Simmons has talked at the Sloan Conference multiple times in the past and often refers to himself as a stat nerd, yet he still has these old-school ideals. 

Sabermetricians still have a way to go, though, as far as getting their message across. Many people still grow up watching programs like Baseball Tonight and reading old columnists who love to bash advanced stats. Although several MLB players have expressed interest in this newer way of looking at baseball, the majority of them still lean on stats created in the 19th century. They were told those older stats and ideas were meaningful, and they, too, have gone on to tell other players and fans to look at baseball that way. Until players start to accept sabermetrics, or networks stop filling 99% of their TV analyst positions with former players, baseball consumers will inevitably believe what they hear.

Not everyone decided to read Moneyball at the age of 19, or started listening to the (now-extinct) Baseball Today podcast at the same age, or had a college buddy who consumed sports in a sabermetric fashion. I'd probably laugh at a piece like this today if I didn't experience those three things. I'm no smarter than anyone else, I just benefited from good timing. People need to experience things like this at a young age if they're going to adapt. 

Sabermetrics certainly aren't perfect, and people should question them all the time, like Law said. People like me prefer them, but if someone would rather look at traditional numbers, they obviously have that right. But that doesn't mean they are right, and their constant rejection of new methods of baseball consumption is extremely close-minded and stubborn.

It's hard to blame these people too much, though, because they probably grew up hearing about the greatness of the traditional baseball viewpoints and can't imagine a world where these values are misleading or flat-out false. You might have more success convincing a devout Christian, Muslim, or Jew to question his/her religion than convincing a traditional baseball fan to embrace advanced stats.

Hopefully, generations in the near future will grow up looking at baseball through the clearest lens available to them, questioning everything they hear, whether it's "old-school" or "new-school." The further they get into adulthood, the less likely it will be for them to change their minds.

The All-Star Game's Identity Crisis

People inside and outside of baseball need to start making some decisions about the All-Star Game. What do we want it -- and the players participating in it -- to be? Someone might say it's foolish to look at an exhibition game and make it sound so meaningful, but people are even torn in this area. Is it just an exhibition game or is it more?

The fact that it determines home-field advantage in the World Series sure makes it seem like more than an exhibition game. Plus, there are managers that seem intent on winning the game like it determines a playoff spot. Look at Jim Leyland, who gave every Final Vote spot in this year's game to a reliever. More deserving players like Evan Longoria, Adrian Beltre, Josh Donaldson, and Carlos Santana won't even get a chance to get voted on in the final ballot, although can you blame Leyland for wanting more relief help? He's managing a Tigers team that has a great chance to get back to the World Series, so he has every incentive to win the All-Star Game and get the all-important home-field advantage. Bullpen depth is always key and All-Star teams go through pitchers faster than position players (playing in the field and getting a few at bats for 3+ innings would not be considered as much of an injury risk as leaving a pitcher in for that amount of time, so managers also feel more pressure to use more arms).

So, even though Leyland's Final Vote decision is ridiculous, he shouldn't be the one to blame. If the game didn't count, maybe he just goes with the more deserving position players or starting pitchers. That's Major League Baseball's fault.

In the other league, Yasiel Puig is causing a similar stir because he's played in a very small amount of games, not just for this season but for his entire career since this is his rookie year. Many people think it's ludicrous for someone with a 32-game track record to make it over someone who's played for twice as many games this season and has been in the league for years. Others think it's the All-Star game is simply a marketing event, so since Puig is such a big, exciting name, he should get a spot.

(Related note: I highly doubt Puig will draw more fans to the All-Star Game if he's voted in, given that he'll play for an inning or two at most. People aren't going to be saying, "I can't wait to hear Puig's name announced, and possibly see him make some nice defensive plays with maybe -- fingers crossed -- two at bats!" Fans will likely vote him in, which is fine. If the fans are so eager to see him, let them decide. That said, the increase in eyes he'll bring to the game will still be insignificant. People who normally don't watch the All-Star Game aren't going to be glued to their TV waiting to see Puig when they're not sure if or when he'll even get in.)

But Puig is just one extraordinary case. What about Bryce Harper, who has missed a lot of time this year in just his second big-league season? He's exciting, but does he deserve a spot over a proven veteran who's played more this year?

What about Chris Davis over Prince Fielder? On last week's "The Baseball Show with Rany and Joe," Joe Sheehan said Fielder should get the nod because he's been better for several more years than Davis. But Davis has been one of the most exciting players during the first half in which he's played much better than Fielder, so should that overrule a better track record?

The same argument could be had about whether Matt Harvey should start over proven guys like Clayton Kershaw or Adam Wainwright.

Every year, we have these debates and they seem to have been magnified this year with Puig and the relievers in the AL Final Vote. One big step towards clearing up this murky situation would be to stop making the game count. Evidence has shown that home-field advantage has a large effect on the eventual World Series champs, so it's moronic to give a team like the 90-win Wild Card Cardinals from 2011 home-field over the 96-win division champion Texas Rangers -- who played in a tougher division and league -- based on one game in which players from both teams had little-to-no impact. The Cardinals, by the way, won that Series in seven games, with the final two wins coming in front of their home crowd.

Getting rid of this home-field advantage rule would also increase the likelihood that managers would pick more exciting, deserving players as All-Stars instead of relievers who no one has ever heard of.

However, there would still be a divide between the "it's a marketing event" group and the track record group. People like Keith Law -- who's in the former group -- and Sheehan -- who's in the latter -- would probably feel just as passionate about their sides of the argument even if the home-field advantage travesty was eliminated. Managers, players, and fans would likely still feel split, as well.

There will never be an All-Star Game in any sport without people complaining about players who are undeserving or snubbed. It's part of what makes it so fun. I personally think Davis's spot as the starter is well-earned but I certainly don't ignore larger samples and better track records. The MLB All-Star Game will always have some type of identity problem, which isn't really a bad thing.

Still, there needs to be less ambiguity. The AL will have six relievers on this year's All-Star team, which is four, maybe five more than are necessary. There are several starting pitchers and position players who are more deserving.

Plus, there's still a divide between the new-school and old-school way of looking at baseball. Guys with gaudy win, save, and RBI totals (*cough* Brandon Philips *cough*) are still making it over players with much better numbers in actually meaningful statistical categories.

The first step towards eliminating some of this ridiculousness would be getting rid of the "it counts" nonsense, but the All-Star Game will still be more frustrating than it should be. The debating is fun but if people involved with baseball can start to agree on more aspects of the game, the outrage over snubs will feel more like a spousal argument over what movie to see instead of an argument about one of them cheating on the other.

The Orioles and Their Young Stars are Spitting on Regression

Chris Davis launching a three-run homer off the Yankees' David Phelps on Saturday

I feared this would happen. The Baltimore Orioles have not come back down to earth and likely won't for the rest of the season -- not much, anyway -- after vastly overachieving in 2012. I'm certainly not an Orioles hater -- I really like this team, in fact -- but after a such a fluky 2012 season, part of me wanted them to regress to the near-.500 record they should've had last year.

While people like me looked at Baltimore's 29-9 record in one-run games as an unsustainable, once-in-a-generation outlier that wasn't indicative of the team's true performance, other people pointed to the fantastic bullpen (valid argument), Buck Showalter's managerial skills (ditto), magic (oh boy) the Orioles' grit (please stop), and their "will to win" (/barfing). It wasn't as annoying as the Trout vs. Cabrera MVP debate, but it wasn't too far behind.

People were so reluctant to admit that the Orioles were lucky. Teams with winning percentages over .700 in one-run games have been as rare as, well, teams with the same winning percentages for entire seasons. There's just too much randomness involved in games of such a close margin. Sure, having a good bullpen and a smart tactical manager are major advantages going late into games, but plenty of teams have had those two things and not come close to the .763 winning percentage Baltimore had in one-run games last year.

As a sabermetric-minded baseball consumer, I wanted the "will to win" side of the argument to (hopefully) understand this fact by witnessing major regression from the 2013 Orioles. Problem is, the 2013 Orioles have continued to be good, and even if they're average the rest of the season, they still might make the playoffs. Like I expected, confirmation bias has infected the brains of many people in the "2012 wasn't a fluke!" crowd. Here's an example. And another (out-gut!). One more.

These people are like a guy who's convinced a girl is into him even though she's done everything short of saying, "I'm not interested." "But she had this look in her eyes," he says. The Orioles' record hasn't gotten worse because they've made significant improvements this year. Last year, they were an average team playing well above their heads. This year, they're simply a good team playing just about up to their ability (47-36 actual record, 44-39 Pythagorean record).

The biggest contributor, of course, is Chris Davis, who's gone from a decent hitter with power who strikes out too much to one of the best hitters in the game with all of the power who still strikes out, just not as much.

They've also seen Manny Machado make the leap. He's now one of baseball's best young hitters and an absolute phenom defensively.

J.J. Hardy, Nate McLouth, and Adam Jones have also been having solid seasons. As a whole, Baltimore's offense is 2nd in the majors in WAR and 3rd in wOBA. They're also one of the best fielding teams.

The pitching staff has actually been pretty bad so far this season, so if they improve, this team could get close to the 93-win mark. Legitimately.

Baltimore's record in one-run games right now: 12-11. They've already lost more games in one-run contests in 2013 than they did all of last year, and we just started July. So, people who screamed "regression!" before the season have actually been correct, so far, but because the Orioles have improved their talent level so much, the regression in close games hasn't cost them.

Let me reiterate, I really like this team. Davis, Machado, Jones, and Matt Wieters (if he'd ever hit) are some of my favorite players. Camden Yards is gorgeous. In fact, I didn't even hate last year's team; I just couldn't stand the narratives surrounding it.

That's why the 2013 Orioles have also been frustrating. People still don't think the 93 wins from last season were fluky, and the continued success this year has confirmed their false claims in their heads. The Orioles have been building a quality roster for years and are now experiencing the results of good draft picks, trades, and signings.

This is the first season of a prolonged run of excellent baseball in Baltimore. Not last season. It's OK to admit your team got lucky in 2012, Orioles fans. You got to enjoy a playoff team, regardless of how fortunate they were. From the looks of it, that will be one of many Baltimore playoff teams in the '10s.

Mike Trout, underrated?

I'm by no means a slave to WAR, and it's still early in the season, but check out FanGraphs's leaderboard:

1) Miguel Cabrera -- 4.4 WAR

t-2) Chris Davis -- 4.2

t-2) Carlos Gomez -- 4.2

4) Mike Trout -- 4.1

Baseball-Reference doesn't even have him in the top-10 for position players, so, again, this doesn't mean a ton, but I still find this incredible.Trout's 2013 campaign hasn't been much worse than his historic rookie season, yet he seems to be getting far less recognition.

There are plenty of logical reasons for this lack of acclaim, of course. The three guys in front of him, especially Cabrera and Davis, are having absurd seasons. Cabrera has a .456 wOBA with an absurd .361/.452/.632 slash line. Davis has been Barry Bonds without as many rubber chickens, hitting .337/.413/.720 (.468 wOBA). If Gomez took any walks, he'd basically be replicating Trout's 2012 season. 

So, Cabrera has somehow improved from the plate this season, while Davis and Gomez have come out of nowhere to put up dominant numbers. Trout has not just played below their levels, but his 2012 level, as well, so while his numbers are spectacular, they haven't stood out. 

He also plays for the Angels, who are 8 games under .500, with two highly-paid, struggling sluggers in Albert Pujols and Josh Hamilton, and an ace (Jered Weaver) who has been injured for most of the season. Trout's success has been massively overshadowed by the disappointment surrounding his team, which isn't surprising given how high expectations were in Anaheim before the season.

There's also Bryce Harper, who has been Kevin Durant to Trout's LeBron after also having a fantastic rookie season. Harper came mashing out of the gate this season, causing people to focus more on the him than Trout. Like Cabrera, Harper went from great to greater, whereas Trout has been about the same. People always gravitate more towards players who take a step forward (or a step back, like Pujols) than those who stay consistently dominant. 

It's not even insulting for people to be underrating Trout's 2013 season. All of us would rather focus on someone like Davis or Harper. It's human nature. Still, the fact that Trout is having almost as good of a season this year as he did last year -- a year that very few players in MLB history have ever approached -- is just ridiculous.

He's hitting for about the same amount of power this season, and he's still running the bases exceptionally well (3rd in Ultimate Baserunning Rating), while walking more and striking out less. His UZR is only 0.5, although I wonder if his increased playing time in left field is the main reason.* I haven't watched him enough this season to know how good of a defender he's been.

*He has less ground to cover in left, which means there are less UZR-increasing plays available for him to make, especially with defensive wizard Peter Bourjos manning center field. That might not be the reason for the low numbers, though.

It's obviously way too early to tell if Trout will finish the season with numbers as good or better than last season's. His sophomore slump might occur after July. That said, it's insane that this guy hasn't stopped producing like Willie Mays in his prime. If he keeps playing this well for the rest of the season, we will have a hard time distinguishing his performance this year from last. He also might finish second in the MVP race to Cabrera again.

Can Wil Myers lift the Rays?

On Sunday, the Tampa Bay Rays called up Wil Myers. I was going to write that it was about time the weak-hitting Rays called up one of the top hitting prospects in the league, but then I looked at the team's hitting stats.

They're tied for 1st in the majors in wRC+, they're 5th in WAR, wOBA, and BB%, 7th in ISO and HRs... whatever hitting stat you look at, the Rays are in the top 10-15 in baseball. Far from weak-hitting.

In fact, when you look at their entire team, pitching is by far the biggest reason why they're in fourth place right now. It hasn't been atrocious, but it hasn't been good, especially considering their pre-season expectations.

So, will adding a bat as potentially dynamic as Myers's make much of a difference? Well, it's a complicated situ... NO, he will not make a significant impact.

The best-case scenario is that he'll provide around 5-6 wins of value. That's if he lights the world on fire, a la Trout last season, which isn't likely. 4 wins would even be a stretch. But let's say he does get close to that level. There are 24 other factors -- his teammates -- out of his control. 

Evan Longoria is on the short list for AL MVP at this point in the season, but with his health history, it's probably safer to bet that he'll miss some time and/or play hurt than it is to expect him to keep this pace up. James Loney has been one of the biggest surprises so far this season, but given that his current WAR (1.6) is almost the highest he's ever had in a single season, expect some major regression to the Loney in the second half. I'm a little more optimistic that Ben Zobrist, Matt Joyce, Kelly Johnson, and Desmond Jennings will either continue hitting or get better, but they're probably 3-win players, at best, when it's all said and done.

Jennings might actually be a good comp for Myers. Jennings was also a top outfield prospect for the Rays, and he had a very nice rookie season in 2011, netting 2.3 WAR in just 287 plate appearances. Myers will likely play more than that, so if he can approach Jennings's .259/.358/.449 line over these next four months, he'll be an upgrade over anyone besides Longoria.

But that won't make a difference if his teammates regress like I mentioned above. Sure, if he's worth 2-4 wins more than the guy he replaces, he might be the difference between a playoff team and a team that just misses, but that would have to coincide with sustained success from his fellow batters and huge improvement from the pitching staff. The division is too good for them to be average or worse in one of those areas.

Then, there's the very realistic chance that Myers barely produces. None of us know if he'll make any impact in the big leagues, much less an immediate impact. 

Like I said, if he plays anywhere near his potential, the Rays might get the extra boost they need to win a close division or wild card race. But he's not going to turn the current 36-33 team into a juggernaut all by himself. The Rays are going to need every pitcher not named Alex Cobb or Joel Peralta to improve and improve dramatically. The other hitters have to keep up their success, as well. As we saw with Trout last year, even a historically good season by a player on a good team doesn't guarantee a postseason appearance.