On Brandon Inge

by Charlie Wilmoth on Dec 10, 2007 11:07 PM EST in News


BRANDON INGE Photo: Dave Hogg.

There's been some talk, both here and at WHYGAVS, about whether the Pirates might consider acquiring Brandon Inge now that he's blocked by Miguel Cabrera. The Detroit Free Press reports that the Pirates are "intrigued" by Inge.

Inge was awful at the plate last year but, in a guarded sort of way, I'm "intrigued" by him too.

Inge is a very good defensive third baseman. I can almost hear a couple hundred eyes rolling around in their sockets as I write that. The Bucs under Dave Littlefield promised to prioritize defense and yet so egregiously failed to provide it that I wonder whether a lot of Pirates fans doubt they should even listen when someone tells them that a player is good defensively.

Well, you should, and Inge is good. He has terrific range and an excellent throwing arm; visually, he's a very impressive player. And, more than that, the numbers back him up; UZR ranks Inge the third-best defensive third baseman in the majors last year, behind Pedro Feliz and Scott Rolen; Jose Bautista is ranked fourth-worst. UZR says there's a 24-run difference between Inge and Bautista.

Baseball Prospectus ranks Inge 14 runs above average and Bautista 12 runs below, for a 26 run difference. It also says Inge was 25 runs above average in 2006 and 15 runs above in 2005.

These defensive stats are just one data point among many, true, but the stats and the scouting reports and my own eyes all say the same thing - that Inge is really good defensively.

Now, maybe that wouldn't normally be a big deal, especially given how bad Inge's offense is, but consider that our rotation next year is pretty likely to have three young lefties in it - Tom Gorzelanny, Paul Maholm and Zach Duke. Maholm and Duke are both extreme groundball pitchers, and Gorzelanny causes a fair number of groundballs too.

Left-handed groundball pitchers plus right-handed batters equals lots and lots of groundballs to third. Last year, batters hit .359 off Duke and .295 off Maholm. Acquiring Inge on the cheap might be the single most effective way to bring those numbers down. There's no need to worry about displacing Bautista; he's not a great hitter and he's not a very good defender at any position, so there's no problem with moving him into a semi-platoon with Inge. Bautista would pick up at bats by starting at third when Ian Snell or possibly Matt Morris (who's also a groundballer, but a righty) pitches, and in centerfield when the other team starts a tough lefty.

Another benefit to acquiring Inge is that he can serve as the team's emergency catcher, so the Bucs won't have to waste a roster spot on Michel Hernandez or someone when Ryan Doumit inevitably gets injured.

Now, on the matter of acquiring Inge on the cheap: that's a problem. Inge is owed about $19 million over the next three years. $6.2 million next year isn't a big deal, but $6.6 million in 2010 is, and I don't think it'd be worth it if the Bucs were on the hook for the entire amount. If they could get the Tigers to trade Inge in order to dump the contract (that is, not expect a real prospect in return) and pay a bit of the money, I think it'd be worth it for the Pirates to acquire him. My sense is that, despite trading for Cabrera, the Tigers wouldn't be highly motivated to dump the contract - they can afford him, and he still has value as a bench player for them. But I would ask them just in case.

Tweet Comment 24 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Inge

This is interesting:

My sense is that, despite trading for Cabrera, the Tigers wouldn't be highly motivated to dump the contract - they can afford him, and he still has value as a bench player for them.

The thing is, I recall reading that Inge has ASKED Dombrowski to trade him, telling him that he isn't interested in being a bench player for the Tigers, or anyone else for that matter.

I like Inge a lot as a defender, but not so much as a hitter, although I don't think he's that bad with the stick.

I'm somewhat surprised that no one has mentioned the Bucs trying to sign Mike Lamb...

by bryanzane on Dec 10, 2007 11:34 PM EST reply actions

There is...

still plenty of time for Inge to come around to being a backup.

Actually, though, the Pirates' best chance of getting him at an agreeable price is if he continues to whine about it. So whine away, Brandon - see where that gets you.

by Charlie Wilmoth on Dec 10, 2007 11:51 PM EST up reply actions

Not that bad with the stick?

A career OPS+ of 85 is wretched for a thirdbaseman. He has exactly one season (2004) in which he was above average with the stick.

He turns 31 next year and is already trending downward with the bat (109, 100, 98, 80 OPS+s the past four years). My Boy Jose Bautista turns 27 and has gone 94, 96 the past two years in OPS+.

Neither player is particularly good. Inge is worse.

Like bucdaddy says, let's just try talking Joe Randa out of retirement if we're that desparate to downgrade at an already-weak position.

by matskralc on Dec 11, 2007 6:44 AM EST up reply actions

Um, yeah

I just got the 2008 Hardball Times. It has a graph that shows average hitter performance by age. It shows that Inge is at the age where he's a good candidate to fall off a cliff. (It's amazing how hard it is to convince people that, except for the superstars--which Inge certainly isn't--most hitters go over the hill quickly after age 30 or so. Inge is old for a hitter.) Add in the fact that he adapted slowly to the majors, and he looks like the classic hitter who has one or two good seasons around age 27-28 and otherwise sucks, but is able live off the good season or two for years until GMs finally wake up and realize he just can't hit.

by WTM on Dec 11, 2007 9:01 AM EST up reply actions

Inge

"Add in the fact that he adapted slowly to the majors, and he looks like the classic hitter who has one or two good seasons around age 27-28 and otherwise sucks..."

This is my opinion of a certain left fielder we all know.

by bryanzane on Dec 11, 2007 9:54 AM EST up reply actions

I don't like to think about it

by WTM on Dec 11, 2007 10:53 AM EST up reply actions

BTW

This is a good piece, Charles.

by bryanzane on Dec 10, 2007 11:39 PM EST reply actions

By good do you mean bad?

I think this is the worst idea you've ever had Charlie. No thank you to Inge at any price. Bautista should be the every day 3B next year. How he does (and I'm betting he does well), and Neil Walker's development, can determine the team's direction at that position at this time NEXT year. Inge would simply be a costly complication, no upgrade or upside whatsoever.

And Bautista is not a CF.

by azibuck on Dec 11, 2007 10:42 AM EST up reply actions

Or ...

We could just try to talk Joe Randa out of retirement. He was OK with the glove and he'd probably come a lot cheaper.

Randa, OPS+, 2005: 88
Randa, OPS+, 2006: 81
Inge, OPS+, 2007: 80

by bucdaddy on Dec 10, 2007 11:52 PM EST reply actions

Exactly...

what i was thinking. I'm not sure what NH plan is but I'm starting to get a little nervous. He traded Torres at his lowest value which wouldn't bother except that I now read he plans to keep Marte instead of trading him when his value is the highest. Now there's talk of Barret and Inge. I don't know but it seems like we have tried this before. I think this is a case of trying to have your cake and eat it too. I don't think it is possible to rebuild for the future but attempt to win 82 next year. I'd rather see Lamb signed for a couple of years or try to upgrade at second and move Freddy back to third.

by Slick @ Bucs Dugout on Dec 11, 2007 1:15 AM EST reply actions

Or

they could get a lot closer to winning 82 by keeping the team from last year and just not loose 11 out of 13 after the all star break or whatever it was. If they won half those games, they could have made a .500 record real close last season.

by bucofanNY on Dec 11, 2007 10:10 AM EST up reply actions

This is the wrong direction

What do the Pirates possibly gain for the long term by expending resources on players like Brandon Inge and Michael Barrett? I don't have any problem at all with Huntington stockpiling no names to fill the major league, AAA, AA and A rosters. He should continue to fill the roster with whatever prospects he can get for the present roster. To me, as alarming as the Inge rumors are Huntington's comments that he is looking at keeping Grabow and Marte. For what? For the pennant drive? These are precisely the guys you should be dealing. If he can deal Bay, Nady, LaRoche, McLouth, Grabow and Marte, he should do it. Done properly, and at the right time (in each case next spring-summer), he might actually get a leg up on the first legitimate effort tp rebuild this team yet. We all know that Huntington will have to do this on the cheap. Fine. But let's stop pretending he can rebuild and contend at the same time. Every occasion he uses to get an Inge or a Barrett, or eschew trading a Grabow or a Marte, is a giant step backward and away from reality. He needs to walk away from this contending nonsense and commit, completely, to rebuilding this sorry mess from the bottom up.

by RichieHebner on Dec 11, 2007 1:00 PM EST reply actions

Blowing it up

I think it's pretty clear that NH does not have leave to do this.

by WTM on Dec 11, 2007 1:02 PM EST up reply actions

Just to be clear...

I am absolutely not advocating trading prospects, taking on tons of salary, or blocking anyone. If the Pirates have to do any of those things to get a veteran, than they shouldn't bother. All I'm saying is that if Inge can be had very cheap, he could potentially make things a little more palatable for a while and help out the Bucs' young pitching. Barrett, too - if the fact that he's such a pain can get him traded to the Bucs cheaply, than I'm all for not having to watch Paulino next year.

It's not about pretending you can be a contender. And I wouldn't necessarily read much into NH's comments that he's not trading Marte, at least not until it doesn't happen. That could just be gamesmanship.

by Charlie Wilmoth on Dec 11, 2007 3:49 PM EST up reply actions

Marte & Grabow?

More value now or at the deadline when the Yankees are only a handful of games behind Boston?

by puget sound pirate on Dec 12, 2007 1:50 PM EST up reply actions

Depends.

What's Marte's ERA going to be three months into next season? Probably not better than it was last year, that's for sure...

by Vlad on Dec 12, 2007 2:09 PM EST up reply actions

I'll call Nostrodomus and ask him

what they should do with their lefty relievers. My guess would be hold them until other teams bullpen desperations are at their highest (trade deadline) and unload them.

by puget sound pirate on Dec 12, 2007 2:43 PM EST up reply actions

With Grabow, I agree.

But right now, some people are treating Marte like he's an ace shutdown setup guy because of his hot ERA in 2007, when in reality he's just a good situational reliever who was over his head. The gap between his perceived value and his actual value may not get much larger, even if teams are more desperate at that juncture.

by Vlad on Dec 12, 2007 5:47 PM EST up reply actions

Marte is an expensive situational reliever that

they should deal for prospects. His value now is high for trades. With Grabow's arm problems, it might be wise to hold onto Marte until Grabow shows he is healthy and/or another lefty reliever emerges.

Teams like the Yankees can afford to sit around now and say what prospects they will or will not give up. Once July comes around and they are looking up in the standings at Boston, their stance won't be as firm.

If the Brewers gave up three pitching prospects to the Padres for Scott Linebrink, what would Marte bring the Pirates on the market in July? Littlefield screwed up last year, curious to see how it plays out this year.

by puget sound pirate on Dec 12, 2007 6:23 PM EST up reply actions