Leave Andy Allloooonnne!!!
Pat has a good new post about Andy LaRoche, and I'd like to amplify some of his points here and add a couple of my own. This isn't so much an argument as a series of semi-related points.
1. Again, and this is going to be a recurring theme here for the next couple years, minor league numbers matter. This is a fact. If you don't like it, too bad.
For the next several months, you should ignore anyone who says the Pirates should bench LaRoche, or that the Jason Bay trade was a failure because of LaRoche, without engaging with LaRoche's performance in the minors. LaRoche has had 177 at bats in the majors this year going into today. That's not terribly meaningful compared to what he did in the minors, which was excellent.
I don't mean to shut down debate. Perhaps there is a good argument to be made that LaRoche shouldn't be starting and won't ever be a good player. Nearly all the ones I've seen, though, pretend his minor league career didn't exist or didn't matter.
2. It's common for all kinds of players, including very good players, to start their major league careers slowly. Check out Vlad's excellent comment from a couple weeks back. Vlad names the following excellent third basemen who started their careers in extremely frustrating fashion: Mike Schmidt, Matt Williams, Gary Gaetti, Jim Thome and Robin Ventura. I'd add Troy Glaus and Dean Palmer to that list. It's true that some of those players were younger than LaRoche when they got started, but you can blame the Dodgers for that. He's been hitting like crazy in the high levels of the minors for quite a while. He should have gotten through the adjustment phase already, but the Dodgers threw up roadblocks for years.
3. Pat's right that the Dodgers' apparently low opinion of LaRoche means nothing.
4. Fan opinion is incredibly fickle. This is not new and it shouldn't be surprising, but I admit to feeling baffled every time I open a new Post-Gazette Q+A, only to see the range of opinions tethered like a dog to whatever the Pirates have done in the past two weeks, good or bad. Certainly anyone with a heart is likely to be guilty to some degree, but the extent to which opinions are formed based on a couple weeks or a month of bad play is still far too much. If you're the sort of person who imagines playoff games at PNC every time the Pirates have two good weeks or railed about benching Jason Bay every time he had an 0-fer, you need to relax.
Or to rephrase, because that was kind of an ad hominem attack to describe something we all do to some extent anyway: it's unwise to freak out about small sample sizes.
5. With all due respect to the folks who are still buying tickets, this year doesn't matter. The Pirates are building for the future--and not just for 2009, but for well beyond that. Playing Doug Mientkiewicz or Jose Bautista rather than LaRoche is silly unless you are certain that LaRoche has no future, in which case I would point you back to Point 1 above.
0 recs |
32 comments
Comments
Also
Dejan’s piece in the PG today mentions that no fewer than 6 teams have contacted the Pirates recently in regard to Andy LaRoche (citing their potential “surplus” at third base). Pirate fans are down on him while Major League Baseball GMs are trying to acquire him. I’ll go with the views of baseball’s GMs…
by bryanzane on Sep 15, 2008 10:50 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Pirate fans were down on Aram
And some were very happy when the Pirates gave him to the Cubs.
How did that work out?
Steve Z
by steve_z on Sep 16, 2008 9:05 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I hadn’t realized Andy turned 25 this weekend. Happy birthday!
One minor-league stat: Andy seems to have hit around 100 points better in the Vegas ballpark than in road games, over the last three years.
by Arnold Rothstein on Sep 15, 2008 11:11 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
What Is This Blog For?
Andy LaRoche should start every game at 3B for the rest of the year.
If he doesn’t show more than he has in the past two months, the Pirates should have a Plan B in mind for 2009.
You can cite Matt Williams, Mike Schmidt and others who may have been slow starters, but there have been just as many players who have had outstanding minor league numbers who have never been able to cut it in the major leagues.
If so many other teams are interested in Andy LaRoche, I suggest that Huntington should find out what they are willing to part with to get him.
Talk is cheap!
by thegunner on Sep 16, 2008 12:47 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
The Pirates should ALWAYS have a Plan B in mind
LaRoche could get hit by a bus tomorrow, after all. Not to be flip, but a guy’s career can end at any moment. Just look at Clemente, or Bob Moose. Or, if you want to be a little less dramatic, Juan Encarnacion.
The only question is at what point they need to start thinking about implementing that Plan B, in the absence of a catastrophe. And in the case of LaRoche, I think that he’s got at least a solid three months as the starter next year before you even think about making a change. I mean, Bautista was hitting .195/.260/.299 at the end of April, and people wanted him dumped in the Allegheny. Then by the middle of June, he had the OPS up to around .770, and people were acting like none of it ever happened.
Right now, I think that the Pirates are planning on trying to bring back Mientkiewicz as primary backup at 1B/3B, which would be a decent Plan B in the event that LaRoche flops totally and completely. I really don’t think they’re going to need him, though.
by Vlad on Sep 16, 2008 9:33 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Bringing back Minky is a sad reminder
of everything that is wrong with the PIrates. Teams in total reconstruction need to keep their eye on the prize and not be distracted with aging re-treads. Playing Minky simples takes A/Bs away from developing players and accomplishes nothing towards our goal. Players like him need to be on teams where he can make a difference and perhaps provide them with a special win that propels them into the playoffs.
Keeping Bautista and allowing him to back up the infield positions would have made much more sense. By doing so he might have regained some of his value and thus could have been traded at a time when something of value could have been received in return rather than another light-hitting, defensive catcher. Minky’s value is never going to improve and only decline. Playerslike he and Chavez can always be found swimming off the coast of Puerto Rico and can signed for what they’re really worth…very little.
by Illinois Pirate Fan on Sep 16, 2008 11:47 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Minky =/= Bautista
Bautista can play third base and both corner outfield spots. Minky can play first and third. As such, Bautista isn’t an adequate substitute for Minky, since he’s played a grand total of three games at first base, and he would’ve mostly ended up stealing OF ABs from Moss and Pearce.
Bautista didn’t need to regain value. He was hitting .243/.325/.404 for the year when we traded him, and his career line is .240/.326/.399. He is what he is. A catcher like Diaz IS his true value. If anything, we were lucky to get someone as good as Diaz for him.
Mientkiewicz has a .370 OBP this year. That’s the highest figure among the guys currently on the roster. It’s more than good enough for a bench player and “Plan B”, and certainly much better than either Chavez or a random swimmer off the coast of Puerto Rico.
I genuinely don’t understand your approach to team-building. You want to try and win right away in 2009, but at the same time you want to discard one of our few productive hitters from 2008 just because he’s 34.
by Vlad on Sep 16, 2008 12:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
What I am trying to say is that...
if we are committed to a youth movement then we must go all the way and not waste valuable playing time on veteran subs. If a player like Minky is not part of the future then he shouldn’t be on the roster taking up valuable space. Since management decided to blow up the team and start over then I don’t see the need for people like Minky. He just muddies the water. It’s either/or and since we’re now committed to a youth movement then I believe we should go all the way. I am supportive of management’s decision to blow up the team and start over but only if they are consistent in their approach. Bastardizing the approach and combining vets with rookies is not the proper way to start over. It’s either black or white. There must be no grey areas in our approach so as to minimize the time needed to re-tool.
by Illinois Pirate Fan on Sep 16, 2008 2:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The need for Minky:
1) We don’t have any young players capable of filling his role. As such, we need filler, and better to have quality filler like Mientkiewicz than crappy filler. [Bautista, as a 27-year-old in his final pre-arb year, wasn’t a young player any more than Mientkiewicz was, and while he wasn’t terrible, he wasn’t any better than Mientkiewicz was, either.]
2) For a youth movement to succeed, the young players in question need to play. With that being the case, it’s actively harmful to bring up a young player and then not play him. As such, even if we had a young player capable of filling the Mientkiewicz role, it’d still be a bad idea to use him in that way, since it’d stunt his development.
by Vlad on Sep 16, 2008 3:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Here's a happy reminder for you IPF
The Pirates signed Mientkiewicz to a minor league deal, and when he made the club it was converted into a whopping $750,000 deal (with the same amount in incentives). Bringing DM back as a UT player at a good price would be a fine move for just about any team, including a rebuilding one. Because after one or more of the guys you’d like them to rush to the bigs flames out, I’d rather put in someone competent than rush the next guy too, or insert a total scrub.
And even if you completely discount intangibles, would you rather have Doug around, not complaining, hustling, teaching, or Bautista moping around because he’s not a starter?
by azibuck on Sep 16, 2008 12:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
azibuck
It’s not about the money—it’s about something more valuable and that is playing time. I don’t care if Minky is free. He doesn’t fit the mold of a future Pirate and his presence only reduces playing time for a younger player.
by Illinois Pirate Fan on Sep 16, 2008 2:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why is it either/or?
I brought up money because your last comment was about signing guys for what they’re worth.
But why is the youth movement all or nothing? I can see that with the starting 8 and rotation, but even then, it would be hard to find even 10 legitimate players/pitchers that have 3 years or less experience and can actually hold their own or better in the big leagues, let alone bench and bullpen guys.
And besides that, your argument just doesn’t hold up. Minky has rarely taken at-bats from anyone that didn’t deserve to have them taken. He played a lot early for LaRoche and Bautista who were scuffling like crazy. He got so many AB in August because LaRoche was on the DL (why not Pearce? Fair question.) And in September, he’s made 3 starts. Pearce has 5. He’s got an OBP of .400 as a pinch-hitter.
If it’s all or nothing, then we could/should cut him right now, right? As well as Michaels, Gomez, and Chavez. Replaced by who? I would guess you’d advocate Pearce, Paulino/RDiaz, Bixler, and Cruz. For the final 12 games, sure, I’m with you. For 162 games next year? Plus trading LaRoche and Jack for younger guys? No thank you. A big part of evaluating talent is evaluating your own guys. Diaz, Bixler, and Cruz have little chance of ever being major league regulars in any role. Bixler, for example, I will lay good money on being a career minor leaguer. I’d rather have a cheap vet that won’t strike out on 3 pitches for 2-3 of the bench spots, at least.
I’d also try very hard to find a couple spots in the bullpen for vets that could produce, that have a decent chance of being flipped for anything at the deadline.
by azibuck on Sep 16, 2008 4:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
With Mientkiewicz's current contract + incentives,
Bautista’s pay raise due to arbitration would come close to quadrupling that amount. Think that difference in Bautista’s pay compared to Minky’s could buy themselves one of those ‘swimmers’ in Latin America?
As far as the ‘swimmers’ in Puerto Rico comment goes, I found that to be offensive and beneath you.
by ElliottBayBucco on Sep 16, 2008 1:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
My apologies, I'm bad with math.
Minky’s contract would be a 1/4 of Bautista’s pay raise.
by ElliottBayBucco on Sep 16, 2008 1:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Or a third...
I’ll let Vlad & WTM stick to numbers.
by ElliottBayBucco on Sep 16, 2008 1:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I was told there’d be no math on this test…
When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro. -- HST
by cocktailsfor2 on Sep 16, 2008 9:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
azibuck
It was not meant to be derogatory but rather a statement that it is easy to find middle infielders with good gloves and no bats. It could have just as easily read “off the coast of California”. I chose Puerto Rico because they have produced many slick-fielding middle infielders. It was actually meant as a compliment to their country rather than a detriment. I’m sorry if I offended you. That was not my intent.
by Illinois Pirate Fan on Sep 16, 2008 9:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I wasn't offended
ElliottBayBucco was. I asked why rebuilding had to be all or nothing youth.
by azibuck on Sep 17, 2008 9:28 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
gunner
So you advocate looking elsewhere for a third baseman if Andy LaRoche doesn`t play better the last couple weeks of the season, right?
Plan B or Trade!
Did you ever think that his injury problems this season just might be affecting his hitting still?
“Talk is cheap.” Blah, blah, blah….
by patthatt on Sep 16, 2008 8:55 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
This is a good point
LaRoche tore a thumb ligament this year, and hand injuries can impact production for a surprisingly long time. Particularly power.
by Vlad on Sep 16, 2008 9:35 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Excellent comment
I like the sound of that. : )
by Vlad on Sep 16, 2008 9:24 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Thumb Injury
Get it fixed NOW.
Don’t use it as an excuse.
I’m not anticipating that anyone will get hit by a bus. I’m anticipating that someone will not produce!
by thegunner on Sep 16, 2008 10:53 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Plan B
I think our plan B should be to trade him for Bobby Hill
by DJAnyReason on Sep 16, 2008 11:02 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Tom Brady
I don’t know why he doesn’t just get that fixed NOW.
by azibuck on Sep 16, 2008 11:15 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Pats probably hadn’t thought of that. I think we should keep this quiet.
by WTM on Sep 16, 2008 11:52 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Have you ever had a major injury?
It’s not a matter of “getting it fixed”, it’s a matter of re-learning to use and trust the repaired joint. I tore a tendon in my ankle about a year ago. The surgery went well, and the rehab was smooth… but it was still at least six months after I finished rehab before I really felt natural running on it again.
by Vlad on Sep 16, 2008 12:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
An example
Jim Negrych was a line drive machine in college. Not long after the draft, though, he tore a ligament in his thumb and had surgery. The following year, in low A, he hit 282/340/365. This year, fully healthy, he played at the two higher levels and hit a combined 359/438/482. That’s over 200 OPS points difference. LaRoche is trying to recover against major league, not class A, pitching. He may come through and he may be a flop, but we won’t know shit about what kind of hitter he is until some time next year. And we’ll never know shit if the Pirates follow the old Lloyd McClendon practice of having young players get acclimated to major league pitching by watching it from the bench.
by WTM on Sep 16, 2008 12:46 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
People who have been hit by buses...
…generally don’t produce much afterward.
My point is that LaRoche needs to be the starter for at least half a season before we’ll have any real knowledge of whether he’ll produce or not. Evidently you disagree. Which is fine, except that history is on my side: Most rookies require an adjustment period when they reach the majors, and if you make a snap judgment and punt a slow-starting top prospect, you’ll often get burned down the road.
If he’s still hovering around .200 in July, we can revisit the situation then.
by Vlad on Sep 16, 2008 12:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Are MLE’s standardized, or do people use different formulas? The site minorleaguesplits.com has LaRoche as .692 OPS in 2008, .770 in 2007, .752 in 2006, and .720 in 2005. That takes him back to 21 years old. Are those “excellent” numbers?
by Arnold Rothstein on Sep 16, 2008 2:15 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Maybe not excellent...
…but definitely pretty good, with the exception of 2008. NL average for 3B this year is .266/.335/.443, so that 2007 line would’ve been right in line with that average at 23. If you’re average at 23, you’re generally above-average after it.
If the 2008 drop is related to the torn ligament, and if he’s able to recover for 2009, that’s a promising development curve. It’d be nice if he hadn’t fallen off this year, of course, but if he hadn’t fallen off then we probably wouldn’t have been able to trade for him in the first place.
by Vlad on Sep 16, 2008 3:30 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
good, the Lynchburg Hillcats need a good third baseman.
by hopsfan on Sep 17, 2008 8:09 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

by 














