Should the Giants re-sign
Pat Burrell? As of now, they have the following five players that can man the outfield:
With such a crowded outfield, is there room for Burrell?
In 96 games with the Giants, he put up a .266/.364/.509 slash line, and hit 18 home runs. Among the San Francisco Giants, he had the second-highest OBP behind
Aubrey Huff's .385, and his
OPS+ of 132 was also second-best on the team, behind Huff's 138. The two benefits that Burrell brings are as follows:
1. Plate Discipline...Burrell's walk rate of 13.8% was easily tops among the Giants, and he and Huff were the only two Giants with double-digit walk rates. How important is walk rate? Well, consider this. The Giants ranked in the bottom ten in the majors in walk rate for 2010; in other words, they
need players with plate discipline, because they are quite lacking in that category. Before they had Huff and Burrell, their offense had mighty struggles because none of their players could take a walk. Because free-swinging
Bengie Molina left, and
Pablo Sandoval was no longer the big bat in the middle of the lineup, the Giants were able to create a balanced cast of players (especially thanks to Burrell and Huff) that could guide them to the playoffs.
Keep this in mind: The Giants were the only team in the bottom-ten in the majors in walk rate that made it to the playoffs. Astros didn't make it. Orioles didn't make it. Royals, White Sox, Angels, Mariners, Pirates, Blue Jays, Cubs did
not make it. So, what to take from this? The Giants are in need of players who can walk. And in that category, Burrell is quite adequate.
2. Power...Burrell's 18 home runs were tied for third-best on the Giants. His SLG of .509 was the best on the team, and although it's a small sample size (341 plate appearances), his
ISO of .242 indicates that he has
great power. In 2009, the Giants did not have a Huff. They did not have a Posey. And they did not have a Burrell. Burrell was one of the major bats in the lineup that drove the Giants' offense to a World Series title by virtue of his ability to crush the ball.
The Giants aren't desperate in this category. They've got Posey, Sandoval might rediscover his 2009 power bat, Torres has a little pop, Huff could be brought back, Uribe could be brought back. Burrell's power isn't a necessity, but it's surely nice to have.
Ah, but every rose has its thorns. Burrell
does have two major perceived flaws:
1. High K rate...Burrell's strikeout rate of 26.6% was the second-worst on the team behind
Eli Whiteside. And surely, his dreadful World Series in which he batted .000 and struck out 11 times in 13 at-bats, is not forgotten. If he's supposed to be a big bat in the middle of the order, the way I see it, he needs to make contact a
little more often.
2. Defense...the defensive merits of Burrell are hard to get a full grasp on, merely because he hasn't played a full season in the outfield since 2008. What is a sure fact, however, is that advanced defensive metrics haven't been too kind to Burrell throughout his career. Since 2002, he's cost his teams about 40 runs on defense (based on
UZR). His arm is average, however, and especially adequate for a left-fielder.
Quite lacking, however, is Burrell in his ability to cover range. In 2006-2008, his range (or lack thereof) cost the Phillies 44.5 runs (based on
RngR). Having seen Burrell run, it's not hard to understand that he can't cover much range out in left field.
So what to take from all of this?
On the offensive side, I feel like
Pat Burrell is a less-extreme version of
Mark Reynolds. He's got power, walks a lot, and strikes out a lot.
On the defensive side, he's nothing special. The Giants, however, could work around that flaw. They could give Burrell the same treatment they did this year, taking him out for later-inning defensive improvement. Also, if he was to be used as a pinch hitter, the Giants wouldn't have to deal with his mediocre defense. That was, after all, the original intention when he was acquired. I don't think he wants to turn into
Matt Stairs at the age of 34, though.
The big looming question is, how much will Burrell want? Based on his
WAR, his performance with the Giants in 2010 was worth about $11MM. After seeing his bat disintegrate in the World Series, however, I have lost confidence in the belief that he's back to being an impact bat.
I think the Giants should just play it safe. I think they should give Burrell a small contract (like Huff's 1yr/$3MM deal) to be a pinch-hitter and occasional left-fielder (an outfield reserve). And if all goes well, he'll force himself into a starting outfield spot as he did in 2010. If he's not willing to take such a small contract, he's not worth it. He's too risky at this point. I wouldn't want to see that World Series
Pat Burrell struggle at the plate day after day in 2011 and receive ten million dollars for those services. That risk is just too eminent.
After all, how did the Giants enjoy so much success in 2010? The bargain contracts that outweighed their horrible contracts. Torres, Huff, Posey, Bumgarner etc. all played top-notch baseball on cheap contracts. That's how this team is going to need to build success around Rowand's 5yr/$60MM contract and Zito's 7yr/$126MM contract.
Yes, this is rather cruel. Pat the Bat did a lot to help the Giants bring home their first-ever World Series title since moving to San Francisco. But in order to succeed, they need to minimize risk. And I see Burrell as a mighty risk, given his bat's propensity for rapid-aging.
Andrew Baggarly - "Bringing back Pat Burrell is a matter the Giants are discussing right now. I know Bochy loves Burrell’s clubhouse presence, but he’d likely be in a reserve role."
