As free agency opens today, the buzz about the Giants bidding for Rafael Furcal won’t go away. I dismissed the thought last week, and I still don’t get it.
The thinking seems to be to install Furcal at short, let Burriss and Frandsen compete at second, and, according to Baggs’ Merc story this morning, let Sandoval have most of the starts at 3B. (What? Didn’t Sabes say last month Sandoval was “penciled in” at first base?)
If he’s healthy — a big if — Furcal is a better-than-average offensive shortstop, though not a force of nature. His lifetime OBP is .352, not bad but not elite, and not an improvement over the Giants’ current leadoff guy, Fred Lewis, whose career OBP is .359 (in a much smaller sample size, but still). If you’re curious, the switch-hitting Furcal has no OBP platoon split: same OBP from either side of the plate. Lewis is slightly worse against lefties, but still quite acceptable.
In his twenties, Furcal bolstered his OBP with base-stealing skills, but as he heads into his thirties with a significant injury history, you can count on him stealing less and less.
Furcal can add power: he’s hit as many as 15 HRs twice, but it’s not as much a bonus as I expected. His career SLG is .412. He’s often been among the top-10 slugging shortstops this decade, but never in the top five. In his last full season, 2007, he slugged a paltry .355.
His defense is well above average. He’s got a great arm, which not only helps on bang-bang infield plays but also on relays of balls hit into the deep gaps at Mays Field. As for his glove, from 2005 to 2007 he was first or second in the majors in range factor and middle to above-average in zone rating. But back injuries, which shelved Furcal for most of 2008, have a way of making athletes look old before their time.
So what do we have? If his back has healed completely, we have a very good defensive shortstop who will likely get on base 35% of the time, steal a moderate number of bases and hit with more power than Manny Burriss, perhaps a lot more, but not enough to make up for power droughts at other positions. Before his lost season of 2008, PECOTA projected him with a .341 OBP / .385 SLG in 2009. Look for that projection to drop when Nate Silver gets back to PECOTA this winter.
The biggest argument for signing Furcal seems to be that he won’t cost a draft pick. But the bidding will probably start at two years, $10 M per, and rise from there. If a lot of that money was tied to incentives, I could start to see it work, kinda sorta, for the Giants. But a guaranteed $20 M or more to a big health risk with a very small chance of being a major difference maker? No thanks.
Are you pro-Furcal or anti-Furcal? When you hear his name, do you automatically think of Furbies? Discuss.
