What would you do?
So Nate McLouth is currently tearing up the MLB with the stick while playing good defense in center field. But there is a problem: the organization's best prospect is a center fielder, and nothing else.
Now there is plenty of time for management to evaluate both of these guys, or for one of them to make the decision easy--through injury, lack of production, or something else. But for purposes of this post, lets assume that they are both legit and will stay healthy.
Now for Nate, by legit I don't mean the .333/.414/.627 line he is currently posting. I was thinking a few prime seasons of .290/.385/.500 or so, with 20-35 steals depending where he hits in the order. I think he is entirely capable of this line, if you don't then say so, because it will probably affect your answer to the ultimate question.
Legit for Cutch, in my eyes, would be a June-July call up and demonstration that he is ready--so ready that there is not question he will be with the big club to start 2009 and that the organization is ready to commit to him as a major-leaguer. There is no need for a general stat line here, I think most will know if he is ready or not after seeing 3-4 months of him in '08.
Obviously McLouth's value would decrease if he was moved to left field permanently, but to keep him with the Bucs as one of the organizational building blocks, that seems to be the only option.
Given that McLouth is good for the rest of '08, and McCutchen is ready to take over as the centerfielder in 2009, I would be 100% in favor of making Nate McLouth our left fielder of the future. I think his bat is good enough, and I think it is worth it considering we don't really have any other options in left, at least none that are as good as Nate. We have enough other holes that need to be filled through other means--it just seems smart to let him take left.
So, what do you think?
I'd really like to hear what other people think about having a McLouth, McCutchen, Pearce outfield for a few years. Or, do you think the Bucs should trade one of them? Or, do you see McLouth as more of a fourth outfielder in the future, and we should look for other ways to fill left? Or is there something else to consider I am missing?
0 recs |
11 comments
Comments
Well........
Thinking a few years out is probably well beyond the scope of anything purposeful since we all agree that management is going to try to overhaul the roster and bring in prospects for Bay, Nady et al if possible.
But, to answer your initial question about McLouth I think he can definitely be an everyday left fielder. In having the conversation with a friend last night all of a sudden it become apparent that McLouth is starting to look like Alfonso Soriano offensively while playing very good defense. Maybe a little less power, but 6 HRs in 25 games certainly translates to 20-25 and I think 25 stolen bases is a no brainer. He is also much more disciplined and should have a higher OBP. I imagine Nate wil be ensconsed in left field for the next three to five years starting August 1.
by dtoddwin on Apr 29, 2008 2:01 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
left is good
especially pnc park’s large left field. nate is well suited to play the position, provided he keeps hitting like this. i look forward to seeing a mclouth-mccutcheon-pearce outfield. if only we had a right fielder with a last name that started with “mc”
by johnnycuff on Apr 29, 2008 3:15 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I'm open to many possibilities.
I’d be willing to make him the LF, or to trade him for more-than-equal value if a deal presented itself. Which it might.
by Vlad on Apr 29, 2008 3:34 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
More than equal value?
You think we can get the equivalent of Andy Van Slyke, Mike Lavalliere, and Mike Dunne for him? Why not keep him. He’s just reaching his prime (26 years old) and maybe, just maybe he going to become an even better player. We might be looking at 2/3 of a very good OF soon, and with three developing pitchers there’s the start of a turnaround.
by meandterry on Apr 29, 2008 6:21 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
"Three developing pitchers"
Snell, Maholm and … um …
by bucdaddy on Apr 29, 2008 11:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The other one is
Zach DukelannyBenschurnett
Biased Fan
A disillusioned Pirates fan in Utah...
by UtesFan89 on Apr 29, 2008 11:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I couldn't get
his name to fit in there.
Zach DukelannyBenschurnetteekos maybe?
Got Duke, Gorzo, JVB, Burnett, Meek & Moskos into that one.
Now for Dumatrait…
Biased Fan
A disillusioned Pirates fan in Utah...
by UtesFan89 on Apr 30, 2008 8:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
He said three developing "pitchers" not "starters
Obviously the third is Meek.
by azibuck on Apr 30, 2008 8:27 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You never know what you can get...
...until you ask.
Maybe Matt Kemp trips over a sprinkler head, and Colletti offers us Kershaw. I like Nate, but that’s a no-brainer.
With where we’re at right now (aargh!), we can’t afford to close off any possible avenues of improvement. We have good CF depth, and we can potentially leverage it to fill one of our many holes in other areas.
by Vlad on Apr 30, 2008 10:45 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Gorzo
The third is Gorzo. I would think that was obvious, but it seems you guys are ready to give up on him. Why not just release him – is that the attitude? I’m having trouble seeing fans here; just long-suffering critics who’ve lost their patience and maybe their sense of perspective.
by meandterry on May 5, 2008 10:39 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

by 













