Quick Note On Hunter

Torii Hunter said that he'd be interested in playing for the Nats. As usual, with thise puff FA interviews, it leaves out the second clause, "if the Nats are the highest bidder for my services."

At any rate, here's a quick, non-rigorous analysis.

I've been in love with Runs Created lately as a quick and dirty way of estimating player value.

I averaged his last three years of performance, giving him more credit for last year and the previous year (on a 3/2/1) value. Basically, I multiplied his RC values for last year by 3, '06 by 2 and added in his '05 value. summed it up, then divided by 6.

Doing that, he has an established value of 88 RC while using 442 outs. Note that this is generous to him, giving him more credit for his terrific '07 season, and valuing his previous injury-filled seasons slightly less.

As I explained yesterday, the average NL CF created .181 runs for every out they used. Multiply his 442 outs X .181 means that an average CF would've created 80 runs over the same number of outs. His 88 minus the average 80 means that he's about 8 runs better than an average NL CFer.

If that seems low, it's because you're not considering his low on-base percentage. Over the last three years, it's hovered between .334 and .337, which is low for the typical middle-of-the-order hitter. As a comparison, Grady Sizemore had 98 more plate appearances than Hunter, but only caused 10 more outs. Those extra 80 outs really add up and detract from his value.

So we've got him about 5-10 runs above average offensively.

Defensively, he's lost a step from where he was, which was the best CF in the game. He's battled through leg problems the last few years. You might remember a play from the playoffs two or three years ago, where he looked completely terrible, butchering a ball that fell for an inside-the-park homer. Still, at worst he's league average. Let's give him the benefit of the doubt and say he's 5 runs better than an average CFer (even though he's sure to decline more over the next few years).

Add it up and he's a 5-15-run player... 1-2 wins better than average. Good. Not great.

He's already turned down a 3/$45 million offer from the Twins and is supposedly looking for a 5/$70ish offer. There's no way he's worth that. He's asking to be played like an elite player when he's more like Austin Kearns... someone who's above average, but isn't the kind of player who can carry a team.

Just for giggles' sake, let's try the same with Church... just to get a comparison.

Using the same weighting method, we get an established level of 57 RC and 264 outs. That's .216 runs created for every out that Church makes.

If we give him Torii's playing time (Hunter's 442 outs X Church's rate .216), he would create 95 runs versus Torii's 88 and versus the 80 RC an average CF would create.

If that doesn't seem kosher to you, consider that last year's disappointing .349 on-base percentage is 12 points higher than Torii's career high and that Church's also disappointing .464 slugging average is just 5 points below Hunter's career mark, despite Church playing in a pitcher's park.

As crazy as it sounds, Church might actually be a better offensive performer, on the order of 5-10 runs.

Now, obviously, he gives back some of that on defense. He'd give TONS of it back if this were the Hunter of old -- a player who was probably +20 on defense. Even if you assume he's the Hunter of old, Hunter only comes out about 10 runs better than Church, all things considered.

Is that worth $75 million?

I like Hunter's style, but I also think he's a pretty bad teammate. Here's an example. He's repeatedly ripped Joe Mauer and some of his other teammates for not playing hurt (uhoh...sounds like Guillen!). Meanwhile, check out his games played total. Do we really need that?