In looking to fill out their bench, the Mets have shown some interest in Ryan Raburn.  As a right handed bat, you could do worse. 

Last year was the best year of Raburn’s career. He set career highs in batting average, on base percentage, and slugging. It’s odd, but it’s not unusual for a player to have a career year at 34. It’s definitely strange that someone coming off a .301/.393/.543 season didn’t have his $3 million option picked up. It’s strange even if the team was a mid-market team like the Indians. It really makes you question what is happening there. 

What’s happening was Raburn was limited to just 82 games. No, he wasn’t injured. It’s just that the Indians really limited him to playing against lefties. He had 176 plate appearances against lefties and only 25 against righties. It was a decision that makes sense. In his career, Raburn has hit .250/.297/.326 against righties and .264/.339/.487. 

Looking at Raburn, two other players immediately come to mind. The first was Scott Hairston, who had some success in a similar role with the Mets. Where Hairston got into trouble was when a Mets team lacking depth had to play him more frequently than they would’ve liked. The other player was John Mayberry, Jr., who hit .164/.227/.318 in 59 games with the Mets. He was released in July. 

Why was Hairston successful where Mayberry wasn’t?  Who knows?  They’re bench players. Bench players typically can’t be relied upon for yearly consistency. The main reason is you’re always relying on a small sample size. 

Looking at his career numbers, we see Raburn hits lefties well, but nowhere near as well as he hit them last year. We see a player who is a poor pinch hitter with a triple slash line of .184/.309/.368 in 136 plate appearances (small sample size). We also see a player who is predominantly a corner OF. Here’s his games played by position over his 10 year career:

• 1B – 9 games
• 2B – 143 games
• 3B – 27 games
• LF – 261 games 
• CF – 28 games
• RF – 171 games 
• DH – 93 games 

Last year, he only played left, right, and DH. He was predominantly a DH. It’s surprising because he’s been an average fielder. You know what he isn’t?  A first baseman. You’re not a first baseman if you play 9 games there in 10 years. It doesn’t mean he can’t play there. It means we don’t know. If you remember with Mike a Piazza playing first is easier said than done. 

Raburn would be an improvement over a player like Eric Campbell with his hitting against lefties. Campbell has hit .220/.318/.339 in 149 plate appearances. It should be noted, even if for argument’s sake, Campbell is a slightly better defender, a better bet at first base, and a much better pinch hitter. Campbell is a career .293/.426/.390 pinch hitter in 54 plate appearances. 

So who would I rather have?  Raburn. He’s the better player. However, if signing Raburn stands in the way of the Mets making a significant addition, then I’m alright with the Mets proceeding with Campbell on the bench. Overall, while Raburn is an improvement, he’s not so much of an improvement that he’s worth losing out on another player. 

I’m not so much interested in Raburn as much as I’m interested as in what a Raburn signing would mean for the Mets.