Plus there is the ballpark factor
From Rob Neyer on ESPN:
In Damon’s four years with the Red Sox, he batted .295/.362/.441 (that’s batting average, on-base percentage, slugging percentage) and played excellent defense in center field. That’s almost the very definition of great value.
But Damon, like virtually every other Red Sox hitter since the 1930s, has benefited from his home ballpark. In Damon’s four seasons at Fenway Park, he’s batted .310/.383/.442. Away from Fenway, he’s batted .281/.342/.440.
Does that mean Damon is fundamentally a .281 (etc.) hitter? Not necessarily. Players typically enjoy a home edge, regardless of their home ballpark. But it’s not just the natural home edge that’s caused Damon to hit for a higher batting average and draw more walks in his home games; generally speaking, everybody hits for a higher average and draws more walks at Fenway than elsewhere. The reason for this isn’t a secret: In addition to the cozy dimensions in the direction of Lansdowne, Fenway also features a wonderful hitter’s background (which is probably why left-handed hitters, even those who didn’t routinely take advantage of The Wall, have enjoyed Fenway just as much as righties).
And of course, Fenway Park is just one half of the equation. Over the last three seasons, Yankee Stadium has apparently been neutral (roughly speaking) in terms of batting average, but it has knocked down the walks more than any other park in the American League (and perhaps more than any in the major leagues).
What does this mean for Damon? He’s not going to bat .300 in 2006. He’s going to bat in the .270 to .290 range, with an on-base percentage between .320 and .340 … hardly the numbers the Yankees and their fans are expecting from a $13 million leadoff man. (In fact, the Yankees might be well-served by leaving Derek Jeter at the top of the order; reader Kashif Anwar points out that Jeter’s numbers as a leadoff man are better than his numbers while batting in other slots in the batting order.)
I am, of course, postulating a fairly pessimistic outcome. Damon could, for various reasons, play better in 2006 than he did in 2005. He could hit .337 and win the batting title. But the numbers above weren’t just conjured from thin air, and they are going to show up on the field eventually. Maybe it won’t happen next season. But Damon is 32. He’s not going to get better. He’s going to get worse.
Here was the story on Fox News’ bottom-of-the-screen crawl this morning:
BRONX BOMBSHELL … NY YANKEES STEAL LEADOFF HITTER AND 2004 WORLD SERIES HERO JOHNNY DAMON FROM THE BOSTON RED SOX.
Well, that’s one fairly balanced way of looking at it. Here’s another way:
The Red Sox are going to miss Johnny Damon in 2006, just as they missed Pedro Martinez in 2005. But they lost Martinez because they believed — correctly, in my view — that as great as he was, he wouldn’t be worth $53 million over the course of four seasons. Similarly, they lost Damon because they believed — correctly, in my view — that as good as he is, he won’t be worth $52 million over the next four seasons. If the Red Sox behave as they generally have over the last three years, they’ll take the $52 million they could have spent on Johnny Damon and spend it elsewhere, more wisely.