Huntington: Neil Walker Hasn't Earned Big-League Job

by Charlie Wilmoth on Dec 20, 2009 6:33 PM EST

This is about as mean as the usually-circumspect Neal Huntington ever gets:

"Sitting here today, we feel like we have one Major League third baseman, and that is Andy LaRoche," general manager Neal Huntington said. "[Walker] needs to continue to mature and get stronger. He still hasn't really dominated the Triple-A level to show that, 'Hey, I'm ready to be a Major League player.' He hasn't necessarily earned his way to the Major League level."

I mostly agree, of course. I think it's interesting, though, that both Huntington and John Russell say that Walker needs to get stronger. Other than his defense at third base, Walker's power is the one aspect of his game that has clearly developed well since he was drafted in 2004. His isolated slugging averages have been very good the past couple of years. He's also shown a good arm. If the references to Walker's strength don't have to do with his power or his arm, then I'm not sure what Huntington and Russell are talking about.

The real problems with Walker are that he doesn't hit for enough average, and he doesn't draw enough walks. He's had exactly one OBP above .345 in any year since he was drafted, which is terrible for a former first round pick. Walker hit .194 in a very small sample in the majors last year; while that shouldn't really be held against him at this point, an extremely low average would be a very likely outcome if he were allowed to play much in the bigs next year.

There is reason for some hope, though--Walker hit well down the stretch at Indianapolis last year, and he kept hitting in Venezuela this fall, posting a .267/.370/.448 line in 116 at bats there. The average is still too low, but he did draw a bunch of walks for the first time since 2007, when he was with Altoona. A line like that at Indianapolis might convince me that Walker is ready to help the Bucs, at least in a bench role.

Tweet Comment 43 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

This isn't to say whether Walker is ready or not.

He’s probably not. But Huntington’s comment makes little sense. If a player is required to dominate AAA before getting called up…he’s not going to be calling up a lot of players the next few years. Cutch wasn’t dominating AAA when he was called up…nor was Jones…nor were any of the numerous pitchers called up.

Let’s just see whether he holds the rest of the youngsters to the same guideline of dominating AAA before being called up. Frankly…I’m not convinced that we HAVE a legitimate major league starting 3B.

by Thunder on Dec 20, 2009 7:49 PM EST reply actions

NH Comments

… might just be in response to Walker’s comment late last year that he wasn’t one of this regime’s players, and that’s why he wasn’t in the majors.

I hope we can salvage something out of Walker and Moskos.

by God Loves on Dec 20, 2009 8:14 PM EST up reply actions

AAA

Walker played 19 games in AAA in 2007, 133 games in AAA in 2008, and 95 games in AAA in 2009. That’s almost two full seasons of AAA time. I think Huntington’s point was that someone basically repeating AAA should have been much more dominant.

Cutch had an .854 OPS in his 2nd year of AAA, which showed he was clearly ready for the next level.

by Johnny Nez on Dec 20, 2009 8:17 PM EST up reply actions

I didn't read that as a litmus test

Guys get called up at different times for different reasons. You mentioned pitchers. Sometimes, a team isn’t in position to call up a guy that’s dominating AAA, but they need someone. There’s position need, and potential. Also, guys can earn a call up, while not necessarily “earning” a job as a major leaguer.

by azibuck on Dec 20, 2009 8:45 PM EST up reply actions

I disagree with you

I’d say if you have a wRC+ of 130 or higher that you are showing that you are dominating the competition level. That means you are 30% better than average. McCutchen had a wRC+ of 140 at Indy and Jones had 132.

For me, there are 3 specific benchmarks I look at.

#1. Average near .300 if a HR power hitter and over .320 if doubles power hitter. This shows quality of contact on a regular basis.

#2. K/AB ratio of under 20 percent. If a doubles hitter, should be closer to 10 percent. This shows ability to make contact.

#3. OBP of .370+. This shows pitch recognition and plate discipline.

If a hitter has all 3 of those, then they are ready to try MLB. If they have a K rate of near 25%, there’s a good chance that could balloon well over 30% in MLB, which makes it very difficult to hit higher than .220 in MLB. If they don’t take enough walks, then they aren’t going to see enough hitters pitches in MLB, and if they can’t hit near .300 in AAA, they probably aren’t going to hit near .280 in MLB.

Andrew McCutchen AAA 2009: .303/.360/ 12%
Garret Jones AAA 2009: .307/.348/ 17%
Jason Bay AAA 2003: .303/.410/ 23%
Brandon Moss AAA 2008: .282/.346/ 29%
Steve Pearce AAA 2009: .286/.373/ 17%
--
Jose Tabata AAA 2009: .276/.333/ 13%
Pedro Alvarez AA 2009: .333/.419/ 27%
Neil Walker AAA 2009: .264/.311/ 17%
--
With those benchmarks, you can see that Cutch and Jones were pretty good bets. Brandon Moss had 0 of 3 criteria met, so it’s not a surprise he hasn’t done well. Pearce has 2 of 3 but the .286 BA is worrisome.

You can see Walker is the less ready than Pearce and probably Moss also. Tabata isn’t ready based on these numbers either, but I think his AFL stint, which is competition between AA and AAA shows he may be ready to break out in AAA in the spring.

Pedro’s Ks are a real concern and if he can’t get those down in the 20% range in AAA, things are not going to go well for him in MLB most likely.

by MarkInDallas on Dec 20, 2009 10:39 PM EST up reply actions

If you were going to go on just AAA numbers...

Pearce’s BA would be a little more worrisome than Jones’ would…but Jones’ inability to take walks (OBP only 31 points over BA) would have been more worrisome than Pearce (OBP 87 points higher than BA) with similar strikeout totals. But then…Pearce didn’t hit 20 HR’s the 2nd half of the season in the Majors…so that makes all those numbers between the two irrelevant. Or so some would have you believe.

I’d actually say that Tabata’s numbers are rather encouraging…considering his age. A 13% K rate for his first shot at AAA isn’t too bad…and a number you expect he would be able to hold or improve upon. And if I recall…he slipped the last week or 10 days of the season in BA…possibly ran out of gas at the end of the season??

by Thunder on Dec 21, 2009 2:01 AM EST up reply actions

I do think Tabata’s numbers are very encouraging, especially the K rate. He seems to be further along than Cutch was at this point last year.

Jones’ walk rate was definitely a weak point throughout his MiLB career. He did an excellent job of improving that throughout the year and that is probably a big key to his continued success next year.

by MarkInDallas on Dec 21, 2009 2:40 AM EST up reply actions

"Dominance" is, of course, subjective...

…but McCutchen was putting up a higher raw OPS at Indy in 2009 than Walker has put up at any level, in any season. And he was doing it at a more difficult defensive position.

Personally, I would not consider Jones’s 2009 performance at Indy to be dominant, but it’s worth remembering that Jones wasn’t called up because the team thought he was ready to assume a regular role in the majors. He was called up to be a 25th man, a bat off the bench and occasional spot starter at 1B/RF. And then he got hot.

Right now, Walker is probably capable of being an adequate utility infielder, in the mold of Vazquez. He could play a little 2B, a little 3B, start once a week and put up an OPS in the .600s. That’s not really the kind of ML job you aspire to “earn”, though.

by Vlad on Dec 21, 2009 7:31 AM EST via mobile up reply actions

NH...

needs to remember he doesn’t live in a vacuum. While his words may be directed at Neil Walker…his comments get read by most everyone in the system.

And they swing both ways…especially the first time someone gets real hot at AAA…and DOESN’T get called up…when there is a need. Or when players put up bad numbers…and get promoted over someone with better numbers. Or when potential gets rewarded without productivity.

by Thunder on Dec 20, 2009 10:32 PM EST reply actions

Supposedly

Rewarding potential over productivity won’t be happening anymore. There are times especially at lower levels when the pitchers are not allowed to use certain pitches while they work on things. This has been the case with even Lincoln at AAA, which is why they are high on him despite seemingly ho-hum stats.

They finally let him pitch with a full repertoire at the end of the season, and he did not allow a run in 11 innings.

I haven’t see them automatically promoting anyone or holding anyone back without good reason.

by MarkInDallas on Dec 20, 2009 10:44 PM EST up reply actions

We'll have a good barometer in spring training...

on that theory…Moskos.

by Thunder on Dec 21, 2009 2:02 AM EST up reply actions

Pedro at single A comes to mind.

by Mr. E on Dec 22, 2009 12:32 AM EST up reply actions

They explained their actions there pretty well and turned out to be justified.

by MarkInDallas on Dec 22, 2009 4:42 AM EST up reply actions

Still

It was “potential over productivity” because he certainly wasn’t productive other than some homeruns. They could have waited til he learned to be more patient and draw even more walks if they weren’t throwing him pitches to hit.

by Mr. E on Dec 22, 2009 6:27 PM EST up reply actions

I suspect...

…that NH wants these remarks to be read throughout the system. Walker and Bixler spent most of last season complaining about how the FO doesn’t appreciate them and doesn’t want to promote them because they were Littlefield acquisitions. Why shouldn’t NH meet a challenge to his authority like that with a reminder that those guys would be a lot more likely to make the bigs if they showed they were worthy of it on the field?

by Vlad on Dec 21, 2009 7:38 AM EST via mobile up reply actions

Huntington's curse...

… as well as his blessing is that he is brutally honest and, as he recently admitted, a little too forthcoming in the media.

I agree that if Walker and Bixler want to be considered as viable MLB options for the Pirates, they need to show it out on the field. Whining and crying about how they aren’t “one of Neal’s guys” and that they are being given a chance because Littlefield drafted them is ridiculous; they aren’t being given a chance because they haven’t shown even a remote inkling that they could handle themselves at the major-league level.

However, NH needs to dial it back a little bit in how he speaks to the media. It’s great for us that he gives us so much meat to tear into on the message boards and it makes for awesome talk-show fodder, but it shows that sometimes, he may need to count to 10 before opening his mouth. He reveals himself to be a little petty at times and a little vindictive, and if he is going to run a MLB club with those attributes, he’s going to make decisions based on emotion and that could be highly-detrimental to his long-term prospects in the position.

by Bishop1973 on Dec 21, 2009 9:00 AM EST up reply actions

Your last para...

is one of my concerns. He should be seen…at least in the press…as far as dealing with performance issues…somewhat on an equal basis.

Up until the last 10 games of the season…Andy LaRoche had a sub .700 OPS…yet he’s anointed a “Major League 3B”?? Middle of the pack in fielding (UZR) and 18th of 23 qualifying 3B in most batting stats (even with the amazing last 10 days…otherwise he’d be 21st of 23). Yep…that’s a 3B to build on.

Andy LaRoche is a Major League 3B because he played 150+ games there last year…on a sub .400 winning percentage team…not because he’s been a shining talent. Because there hasn’t been any shining going on there.

As I said in the first comment of the thread…I’m not convinced that we currently have a ML 3B capable of contributing significantly to a winning team. Whether Pedro…or anyone else in the system…is capable of performing at that level…is yet to be seen.

by Thunder on Dec 21, 2009 3:34 PM EST up reply actions

But.....

those last 10 games count. You could just as easily take out 10 games in June where he sucked, say he is better than his numbers, and it would be the same logic.

He isn’t anointed anything. He was a 2.5 WAR player, good enough for 15th among third basemen last year. He isn’t a superstar, but he isn’t a throw away player either.

by element1286 on Dec 21, 2009 3:46 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs

+1

by Vlad on Dec 21, 2009 4:37 PM EST up reply actions

And...

as I pointed out…even WITH the last 10 games…he was 18th of 23 qualifying (per fangraphs.com…those who played 2/3 of their team’s games) 3B in most batting statistics…and in the middle of the pack defensively.

What do you get when just about all of your starters rate in the lower half of their peers?? Usually a 100 loss team.

Gee, what a coincidence.

by Thunder on Dec 21, 2009 6:08 PM EST up reply actions

And the reason

there were only 23 qualifiers is because the other 9 teams didn’t have anyone worthy. 18/32 is what he was. Avg to slightly below avg… in his 1st full year. Like they are saying, room to improve, but not terrible by any means.

by Mr. E on Dec 22, 2009 12:54 AM EST up reply actions

Not entirely true...

because there were at least a couple that didn’t quite play enough…for different reasons…that ranked well ahead of LaRoche. And there might be one or two more if I took a real close look

Mike Lowell didn’t play enough for the Red Sox…due to injury…119 games (but only 107…1 game short…at 3B)…with an .811 OPS.

Gordon Beckham of the White Sox…due to a late arrival to avoid Super Two status in 2 years…102 starts at 3B (6 games short)…with an .808 OPS.
And…Beckham…in 47 less games…hit 2 more home runs…1 less RBI and 12 points higher in BA than LaRoche. Beckham actually had his major league debut the same night Cutch did…in different cities…of course.

So…at best…I’d give him 20th of 25…or 20th of 32 if you’d like. That’s not what I would call average.

by Thunder on Dec 22, 2009 3:43 AM EST up reply actions

Beckham also was bad at defense.

You could even say he was not MLB caliber at 3B. He’s moving to 2B next year, so we’ll see how he does there.

The point is that Andy’s 2.5 WAR is indeed average. He was a bit below average offensively – not a huge amount – and a bit above average defensively. The whole wOBA and UZR thing measures him against the average player. There are some players that don’t play a lot because they get injured, some that don’t because they suck, etc. He was a whole 1.9 runs below average offensively. That is a very small variance from average. If he’s 2 runs above average next year, would that be a shock? No, he really wouldn’t have improved much. He’d still be average.

by MarkInDallas on Dec 22, 2009 4:55 AM EST up reply actions

Beckham, has been.....

a shortstop historically and his defense at that position has always been viewed as average. He projected to possibly play the position at the ML level, so I would suggest his defense should not be viewed as bad.

by David Todd on Dec 22, 2009 9:22 AM EST up reply actions

Taking those objections in order:

Lowell was a horrible, horrible defender last year – no range, due to the injury. He would’ve been behind LaRoche even with a full season’s PT, after defensive adjustments.

Beckham played well, but he was playing out of position, and they’re shifting him back to his natural 2B slot for 2010 (he played SS coming up, but was seen as a future 2B in the draft) and apparently going with Teahen at 3B. LaRoche > Teahen (largely due to defense, where Teahen is very poor).

by Vlad on Dec 23, 2009 11:30 AM EST up reply actions

Should NH have said that LaRoche sucks instead?

by Adam Reynolds on Dec 21, 2009 4:12 PM EST up reply actions

As NH pointed out, Neil Walker is yet to prove himself in AAA, unlike Andy Laroche, over a significant number of ABs.

He did not say that Andy is the the model we want future 3Bs to follow, nor did he say Neil Walker will not get a shot. Walker might get a shot, if only to push Laroche. However, Walker hasn’t earned it by his performance in AAA and that’s a valid point.

I would also prefer that his feelings were communicated to Neil Walker personally, and perhaps in a less blunt way, but that is a different issue.

by BurgherKing on Dec 21, 2009 6:17 PM EST up reply actions

That last part

could also be said about how Walker dealt with his frustration in going to the media. Not that I’ve done any research, but how many other AAA players have come out to the press with stuff like that?

by Mr. E on Dec 22, 2009 12:56 AM EST up reply actions

Ian Snell?

:-)

Free your ass and your mind will follow.

by cocktailsfor2 on Dec 22, 2009 9:27 AM EST up reply actions

lol

Ian was actually the opposite of Neil though, REQUESTING to be sent down as opposed to whining about not being called up

by Mr. E on Dec 22, 2009 6:29 PM EST up reply actions

I know.

;-)

Free your ass and your mind will follow.

by cocktailsfor2 on Dec 22, 2009 8:30 PM EST up reply actions

To be fair...

Did Bixler ever voice a public complaint? My recollection was that Walker was complaining and threw Bixler’s name in as well. Unless I missed something that Bixler said.

Pittsburgh Lumber Co.
http://mvn.com/pittsburghlumberco

by MBandi on Dec 21, 2009 11:58 AM EST up reply actions

There were a couple of articles...

…where Dejan quoted an anonymous player at Indy in response to something Walker said, and if you looked closely at the quote, it seemed pretty obvious that it was Bixler.

by Vlad on Dec 21, 2009 12:28 PM EST up reply actions

ZiPS projects Walker as a 93 OPS+ compared to LaRoche at 94. I still have some hope that Walker is a part of the future, but he has to have a huge season this year to send that message that he’s ready for the Bigs.

by Adam Reynolds on Dec 21, 2009 3:08 PM EST reply actions

When ZiPS starts being able to hit a curve ball, I will start believing it. I look at those things more like fortune cookies than anything.

Hmmm..ZiPS projects Walker as a 93 OPS+ … in your pants.

by MarkInDallas on Dec 22, 2009 4:59 AM EST up reply actions

Walker’s OPS+ is slugging percentage heavy, Laroche’s OPS+ is OBP heavy, OBP is more important than slugging percentage.

by element1286 on Dec 22, 2009 6:05 PM EST up reply actions

Neil Walker hasn't earned an Opening Day roster spot yet.

by patthatt on Dec 21, 2009 9:30 PM EST reply actions

If we have 20 guys on the roster who’ve earned roster spots by opening day, we’ll be doing well.

by WTM on Dec 21, 2009 11:19 PM EST up reply actions

Hell...

I’d settle for 10-15 who have earned it at this point.

by Thunder on Dec 22, 2009 3:44 AM EST up reply actions

Which of the following...

…have not “earned it at this point”?

Ryan Doumit
Zach Duke
Joel Hanrahan
Garrett Jones
Paul Maholm
Andrew McCutchen
Evan Meek
Lastings Milledge
Charlie Morton
Ross Ohlendorf

That’s ten guys from the 40-man. I think you’d be pretty hard-pressed to say that any of those ten haven’t earned at least a roster spot for next year…

by Vlad on Dec 23, 2009 11:35 AM EST up reply actions

I think the team has a lot fewer "holes" than most people give credit for

The only starting players that I feel have not proven themselves able to be at least average MLB players are Cedeno and Clement/Tabata/Whoever. Of course, whether they play that way in 2010 remains to be seen.

I think we should have 4 starting pitchers who are average to slightly above.

The main question mark is the bullpen at this point. If that can be brought to around league average, I think there’s a good chance the Pirates can hover in the 75-85 wins level.

by MarkInDallas on Dec 27, 2009 12:02 AM EST up reply actions

I like the optimism, but it’s hard to agree that most of the lineup has proven to be above average. The only players I’d include as proven average MLB are Iwamura and Doumit. The rest haven’t done it for long enough. The potential is there. But if some of them reach that level again this year then I’ll change my mind.

by Adam Reynolds on Dec 27, 2009 11:25 AM EST up reply actions

Vlad...you made my point perfectly...

I said 10 to 15…you gave me 10…although I might dispute Morton. That means more than 5 would have to EARN a spot in Spring Training for my guesstimation to be out of whack.

by Thunder on Dec 27, 2009 12:46 PM EST up reply actions