Giving Credit to Jeff Francoeur

by Freneau on Aug 18, 2011 10:30 AM EDT in Kansas City Royals News

Yesterday at SB Nation Jeff Sullivan touched on the fact that Jeff Francoeur has had a nice season, proving internet fans, of a certain type, wrong. Well, in the spirit of balance, I would like to acknowledge that Francoeur has had a good season for the Royals.

	G	AB	R	H	2B	3B	HR	RBI	BB	K	SB	CS	AVG	OBP	SLG
2011 - Jeff Francoeur	120	462	60	128	35	3	15	66	34	94	19	7	.277	.329	.463

In terms of WAR, b-rWar has him as a 2.2 win player, which is right in line with his fWAR of 2.3. Despite the gaudy outfield assist numbers, Francoeur is basically a break even defender, as his poor range offsets his great arm (remember that range is overall more important). A non-horrible walk-rate of 6.6% has given Francoeur the most balanced offensive package he's produced in some time, and with offensive otherwise generally down, he's been valuable. He's certainly been better than I would have predicted.

As I've written many times, my main problem with Francoeur has nothing to do with Francoeur the player. As a player, he is what he is. Importantly, his 2011 campaign does not make him some kind or emerging All-Star again, he's not. 2.3 WAR places him 8th among AL RFs, so let's keep some perspective. Do you also want hosannas to Matt Joyce and Brennan Boesch? No, Francoeur annoys me because he's often talked about as some if he's some combination of the greatest coach/teammate/human being ever. He's praised for teaching us about life. Honestly, when I consider all the struggles people are having around this country, I'm offended by that notion. Francoeur might teach us something about life, but I don't think it's really a helpful or hopeful lesson for most of us. But again, we've been down that road before.

To return to Francoeur the player however, he's had a good season. He's made some improvements in the biggest flaw in his game (impatience) and has been really all we could have hoped he would be. I still think the Royals should have traded him at the deadline, but perhaps they were being low-balled. I'm still wary of bringing him back for 2012 at $4 million, but if I could be guaranteed he'd be a two-win player, I might consider it. Mostly, I want some of the outfielders in the system to start paying in 2012, because I don't think the Royals can realistically compete next year. Again, that's another post.

So in the end, this: Jeff Francoeur has been a good player in 2012. I was wrong about that.

Tweet Comment 20 comments | 1 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

This article is going to throw the

cosmos off kilter and cause a widespread phenomenon called “Global Warming”. It is also causing holes in the ozone, rain forest destruction, strip mining, corral reef deterioration, and gas prices to rise.

Scouting the Royals
Royals Prospects

by 306008 on Aug 18, 2011 10:40 AM EDT reply actions

And causes the Royals to sign Frenchy through 2013

by ks.cowboy on Aug 18, 2011 11:29 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs

What would a 2.0 WAR player cost on the open market?

I’m still wary of bringing him back for 2012 at $4 million, but if I could be guaranteed he’d be a two-win player, I might consider it.

Scouting the Royals
Royals Prospects

by 306008 on Aug 18, 2011 10:42 AM EDT reply actions

Also need to consider possible Type B draft pick

Can’t remember where I read this (maybe here even?), but Frenchy still has a chance to qualify as a Type B free agent. So if we let him leave after this year, we might be in line for a draft pick. (I can’t remember the details of what round we get for losing a Type B free agent?)

My feeble attempts at Royals Blogging: http://leavinglastplace.wordpress.com

by HarryL on Aug 18, 2011 11:00 AM EDT up reply actions

Will, I think you touched on the crux of the issue:

Is it realistic to expect the Royals to be able to compete for the post season in 2012?

If your answer is “yes”, then assuming Francouer could produce a 2 WAR season again is reasonable (that’s debateable), then doing that for 4m is defendable.

If your answer is “no”, then the Royals should really just get on with finding out about Cain/Lough and any other young OF prospects they may acquire in the offseason.

If strikeouts are indeed fascist - then find me some starters that believe in fascism

by loyal2sdad on Aug 18, 2011 10:45 AM EDT reply actions

Right, a few 2 WAR players are fine

But a roster full of 2-WAR players isn’t going to get you to the playoffs. You need at least a few all-star level players to get you over the hump.

by Loose Seal on Aug 18, 2011 10:48 AM EDT up reply actions

agreed

An all-replacement level team (in other words, 0 WAR) is set at about 50 wins, right? That means if your 9 starters avg 2 WAR, and your 5 SPs avg 2 WAR, you get to 78 wins. Throw in contributions from the bullpen and the bench, and you should be somewhere around .500

So, the decision hinges on two things:

1) Can Moore replace the deadbeat rotation with enough 2 WAR guys?

AND

2) Can the Royals expect enough improvement from the position players to pick up the additional 10 WAR they would need to compete for the division?

If strikeouts are indeed fascist - then find me some starters that believe in fascism

by loyal2sdad on Aug 18, 2011 11:02 AM EDT up reply actions

Someone should develop some even more advanced stat for the

likelihood and magnitude of a player’s or a team of player’s improvement/unimprovement. I mean those deviation, confidence level, statistics thing.
Mean/average doesn’t give enough insight into future.

I am probably the only Royals fan in Hong Kong?

by Yamfun Cheng Kamfun on Aug 18, 2011 10:53 AM EDT reply actions

I thought some of the projection systems did that?

I mean they cite a 90% and a 75% level of projections, for example.

If strikeouts are indeed fascist - then find me some starters that believe in fascism

by loyal2sdad on Aug 18, 2011 10:58 AM EDT up reply actions

And... cue the 2 year extension

Nice work Will. The Royals read your article and dished out the extension immediately afterwards. Your powers of persuasion are legendary.

by jsolo on Aug 18, 2011 11:19 AM EDT reply actions 1 recs

2 year extension

Edgar knows best.

by kcbottom9th on Aug 18, 2011 11:19 AM EDT reply actions

This is classic I'm sure it took everything in the world for Will to write something nice about Frenchy

and now he just got extended. Can’t wait for the follow up

Checkout Royals minor league notes at www.14for77.blogspot.com

by kcscoliny on Aug 18, 2011 11:21 AM EDT reply actions

Of course that happened

(sigh)

It's all ball bearings these days!

by CentralChamps20?? on Aug 18, 2011 11:23 AM EDT via mobile reply actions

Dayton Moore is trolling RR

by Freneau on Aug 18, 2011 11:26 AM EDT reply actions 1 recs

Wondering if:

1) The FO is worried about Wil Myers developing slower than expected
2) If the FO is now more likely to trade Melky in the off season
3) Will Frenchy ever sit against RHP if his performance starts to falter
4) Does the FO believe in Cain

by jsolo on Aug 18, 2011 11:27 AM EDT reply actions

Posted this in the other article

by jsolo on Aug 18, 2011 11:31 AM EDT up reply actions

Extension

I am ok with this if Cain is in CF on opening day. Otherwise it’s horrible.

I actually would be excited about a Frenchy, Melky platoon.

by Bryan Larson on Aug 18, 2011 11:32 AM EDT reply actions

My other issue is that we just lost a lot of negotiating leverage

We already control Alex, Melky, Mitch and Lorenzo for at least the next year, so there was absolutely no need to make this deal. One of those five is gonna have to be traded, right? Before the Frenchy deal, we could’ve told other teams that we really wanted an Alex, Melky, Cain outfield, and we’d only give one of them up for something good in return. Now, every team know that we have a 2 year logjam in the OF.

by Loose Seal on Aug 18, 2011 11:54 AM EDT reply actions