Schmidt Happens

A Nationals-doubting BallWonk reader whose identity BW will protect writes,

Let's take it easy on the Zimmerman deification. I've seen Mike Schmidt play, and sir, Ryan Zimmerman is no Mike Schmidt. Ryan Zimmerman *is*, however, Austin Kearns. Their OPS was about the same last year (.822 v .830).

Last things first. Kearns did put up Zimmermanesque numbers in 2006. And to Power Austin's credit, the man can draw a walk. BW likes the walks, oh yes. But the "Power" in Power Austin's nickname comes mainly from homers. Comrade Bluegrass walks, he hits home runs, and he strikes out. The Z-man, however, shows much more power inside the park. Oh, he hits home runs, sure. But he also hits about one-third more doubles than his colleague in right field. RFK Canyon National Monument tends to punish teams that rely on the long ball for power; it rewards teams that can hit doubles. And the new digs at the Navy Yard will be only marginally better for home-run bashers. The Z-Man's kind of line-drive power is just more valuable to the Nationals than Power Austin's kind of long-fly power.

But to the point. BW also has seen Michael Jack Schmidt play. Not only is Michael Jack Schmidt BW's favorite ballplayer, BW further believes that if one were to choose a single player to be cloned for an eight-man lineup, a team of Schmidts would beat a team of any other player, including Ruth. Schmidt could field any position at least competently; at third, first, all three outfield positions, and possibly backstop Schmidt would be an above-average-to-superb fielder. Ruth would do OK in left and right, but otherwise Team Ruth's misplays up the middle and around the bases would more than make up for Team Schmidt's lesser power. So BW does not raise the Schmidt comparison lightly.

(Though the prolonged exposure to Phailers "fans" has lately shaken BW's Schmidt-love. Michael Jack, your hometown followers make BW wish he could quit you.)

As one who has seen Michael Jack Schmidt play, in person, in his best all-around season, BallWonk affirms that watching Zimmerman play does indeed remind him of Schmidt. Though BallWonk has a strict statistics policy, he will venture to back up his Z-love by appealing to cold, hard, numbers.

You know how many home runs Schmidt hit in the seasons when he was 20 and 21? Zero. Batting average before the season he turned 22? .000. On-base? .000. Slugging? .000. You know how many fielding outs Schmidt made at third base before the season he turned 22? Zero. Not a one. At the age when the Z-Man was getting his first taste of the big leagues, and racking up impressive numbers across the board, Mike Schmidt had other priorities.

But once Schmidt did decide to serve his team in the majors, it took him three seasons, until he was 24, to put up the kind of numbers Z-Man showed when he was 20 and 21. Schmidt was a below-average hitter in just about every way in 1972 and 1973, when he was 22 and 23. He didn't break out until '74, when he was 24. Even then, Schmidt wasn't doing anything Z-Man hadn't done when he was four years younger.

And in the field? Schmidt played a clean third base from the day he stepped into the Vet. What set him apart and made him the greatest third baseman of all time was his extraordinary range, which was a result of his incredible athleticism and his uncanny ability to read batters and position himself to make plays. Mike Schmidt rarely made plays that looked spectacular. You had to watch him over the course of a game or two, and watch the opposing third baseman, to realize Schmidt's greatness. Schmidt regularly made outs on balls that would be hits against any other team, and he usually made those outs look easy. True defensive greatness is when you make extraordinary plays look routine, and Schmidt did that more than any fielder at any position BW has ever seen with his own eyes. And that confidence of play and range didn't really come into Schmidt's game until that '74 season when he was 24.

But. At 21, Z-Man is already a better fielder than Schmidt was at 23. The average third baseman today fields as cleanly at Schmidt did at his best, though today's average third baseman accomplishes that clean glovework by sacrificing range. Zimmerman fields more cleanly than young Schmidt did, and his range is better than Schmidt's, and better than the league average to a similar degree than Schmidt's was over his peers, in his first seasons.

Has the Z-Man shown the kind of dominating greatness that Schmidt showed at the height of his career? No. But at young Ryan's age, neither had Michael Jack. At the age Zimmerman will be in 2007, Schmidt was having the worst rookie season of anyone in Cooperstown. His sophomore season wasn't much to look at either.

So in fact our Zimmerman compares well to young Mike Schmidt, whether you compare them by season or by age. Maybe Zimmerman at 22 is as good as he's ever going to get. Not many players peak at 21, but it's possible. Or maybe Zimmerman's performance will improve as he matures into his twenties, like most players do and like Schmidt did. If so, the comparisons to Michael Jack will continue, and will continue to be justified.

And to get to a Schmidtian level of all-time greatness, the Z-Man won't even have to double his own rookie productivity at bat and in the field. Like, you know, Mike Schmidt had to.