Moss Question?
by vanslyke on Jun 11, 2009 1:21 PM EDT
92 comments
As a front office, do you decide to less Moss ride out the season in RF or do you put him in a platoon role? When he was traded, the scoop on Moss was that he projected to be a 3rd (upside) or 4th outfielder. With half of June to go, he has close to one full year of baseball under his belt with the PBC. I have yet to see the 3rd outfielder upside. Moss projects to me to be the opposite of Delwyn Young (good defense/weak bat) which is a nice piece, but not an every day starter.
While I would not call us contending, we are only 6.5 out of first and 5 out of the wildcard. We do not have the bullpen or power bat to make a legitimate run, but our offense production from RF is a glaring weakness. I do not advocate a change for change sake, but I do think putting Hinske/Young/Monroe in RF will influence the standings enough while not completely forsaking defense. Should we run Moss out there a full year to see if he does reach upside (3rd Outfielder) since we wont truly contend or would it serve him to go back to the bench or AAA to rediscover his bat?
Of course we do not gain anything of future benefit as a club by playing Hinske or Monroe (and Young is suspect at best on defense), but would it hurt to get an increase in offensive production today from "power position" from a veteran? Hinske and Young have both proven themselves as hitters with power and we could sorely use some home run power. We already have a weak hitting LF, but at least he has been a catalyst with an above average arm. Moss has proven that he cannot hit with RISP and has shown nothing but doubles power in almost one full year of major league service. Maybe I am spoiled by Andy LaRoche who was a higher caliber pick-up, but Moss has done nothing but dissapoint.
I think it is fair to say the McLouth and Moss both projected to be the same type of player with McLouth being more of a 4th outfielder as upside. McLouth showed doubles power with an average glove at AAA. Upon call up, he hustled and with good work ethic became the player he was with the PBC. I can't speak to Moss's work ethic, but he really hasnt had to earn his position. While he has been solid at defense, he just looks lost at the plate. He hits nothing with authority. He had a nice little streak in May, but his peaks and valleys are just too far apart in my opinion. While our talent at AAA and AA are about 1 to 2 years away, do we just suck it up or utilize the tools we may have for RF? Maybe we just need to light a fire under him or something or at least make him earn back his starting job?
This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of the managing editor (Charlie) or SB Nation. FanPosts are written by Bucs Dugout readers.
0 recs |
92 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
He's already in a platoon role
I don’t really understand what you’re looking for, except less playing time for Moss. As a lefty, he will get the better part of a platoon. He OPS’d .796 in May. He definitely should be given most or all of the opps v. righty pitchers for now, and for the summer. By late summer, maybe you make a call then to give up on him, or otherwise give his time to someone else.
There really seems to be a phenomenon among some that Brandon Moss has started every game or close to it. BBref seems a little off on their game logs, so by my rough count I see 41 starts in 60 games including today. That sounds about right.
Moss is then on pace to start 120 games for the season
Regardless of his OPS (which is .651), his average with RISP is awful:
RISP (42 AB) – .190
RISP – 2 outs (14 AB) – .071
RISP – bases loaded (6AB) – .000
This guys is as “unclutch” as it gets. My point is that he may need to re-earn his platoon status. He obviously needs to be accountable just like any other player. He is not playing good now and his valleys are becoming much more prolonged than he peaks.
RISP numbers for hitters...
…have very little correlation from year-to-year. That’s just randomness, not unclutchness.
Interesting "vanslyke"
Your namesake hit .190 in 100 postseason AB. That’s unclutch, in that he performed well below his track record when it counted. Let’s let Moss establish whether he can play at all before we decide whether he’s clutch.
What does that have to do with anything?
Moss has no body of work to judge in the playoffs. I am basing his “clutchness” on his body of work. He does have 323 ABs so precedent is starting.
Moss has no body of work to judge
You should just stop there.
Precedent is starting, let’s let it go on a while.
And it has to do with clutch. You judged Moss’s clutch “ability” based on 42 AB with RISP, in what amounts to the tail end of his rookie year. Perhaps I misread you, but it sounded like you stamped a 25yo with less than 500 major league at bats as Unclutch For Life. I don’t know how you stamp him as anything with that little time in the bigs, let alone unclutch.
Radical Idea
This is a radical idea but bear with me. Trade Hinske, use Monroe as a backup outfielder and platoon Young and Moss for a month, whoever ahs the best numbers can start for rest of the season?
Big Numbers
I don't understand all the people...
…who are acting like Delwyn Young is being slighted by being used as an IF backup, when that’s exactly why the team traded for him in the first place.
Moss should continue to get the majority of the playing time in right field. One of the biggest reasons for our surprisingly successful performance so far this year has been the team’s defensive improvement, and right now Moss is about 15 fielding runs ahead of Young. If you put Young (or Monroe, or Garrett Jones, or whoever the hot bat of the moment happens to be) in right field, Duke and Maholm and Ohlendorf are going to start giving up a lot more runs, because we have an especially BIP-centric staff.
If Moss biffs it this year and we want to reassess and shove Moss back into a reserve role at the end of the season, that’s fine. But until then, he’s our best option, and as such he needs to be out there most days so that we can get a good read on whether he’ll sink or swim.
Vlad:
I agree with your suggestion that we continue to play Moss for the remainder of the season to be certain of his abilities before we make a decision about his future during the off-season. We are not going to contend for the division title this season and so we should continue to develop our plans for next year. Platoon Moss against righthanders and let Young or Monroe play against lefties (perhaps Monroe who’s bat I always liked). We need to let Moss finish out the season before we make any long-term decisions during the off-season.
by Illinois Pirate Fan on Jun 11, 2009 7:40 PM EDT up reply actions
He has had a year
While we should continue the platoon, we should definitely find a stop gap in case he doesnt hit his ceiling.
No, he didn't have a year.
Since the trade, he’s had about 90 starts. That’s a little over half a year.
Can you at least agree
that he is treding toward sinking?
Why would I agree with that?
Month-by-month batting lines with the Pirates:
AUG08: .245/.336/.479
SEP/OCT08: .188/.214/.344
MAR/APR09: .254/.271/.525
MAY09: .305/.345/.451
JUN09: .167/.231/.208
Not seeing much of a trend of any type, there.
You see no trend?
Eliminate Sep/Oct because of injury – not arbitrary, but lets compare a healthy Moss to a healthy Moss
AUG08: .245/.336/.479
MAR/APR09: .254/.271/.525
MAY09: .305/.345/.451
JUN09: .167/.231/.208
What about those numbers (even inflated for May) show 3rd outfielder upside?
Ignoring the issue of assuming month borders...
…as hard caps between “healthy Moss” and “injured Moss” (a questionable proposition), you have basically a half season of playing time. That’s not enough to be more than a vague hint in any direction.
If you want to see Moss’s upside, you need to broaden your data source and look at his scouting reports and his minor league performance, both of which suggest that he could become a decent starting outfielder.
In my opinion, Moss should see his playing time decrease. He is a fourth outfielder at best and he continues to prove it. I would like to see Hinske and Young get more playing time out there, although they are already platooning with Moss. But perhaps the front office is already losing faith in Moss with the acquisition of Chris Snelling. Will we see him in Pittsburgh if Moss continues to stink up the joint? Probably. It just seems to me like the Pirates are once again just trying to bring in these washups to help patch up another bad trade. This is the downside to the McLouth trade. Moss isn’t getting the job done? Fine. Now would be the time to move McLouth to right and call up McCutchen to play center. People talk like we HAD to trade McLouth in order to make room for McCutchen when in reality, we didn’t have a very good RF to begin with and now would be the perfect time to slide McLouth over and bring up McCutchen. McCutchen and McLouth in the same outfield would be sick! But there’s nothing we can do about it now. What’s done is done and there’s no sense in talking about it. We are stuck with a fourth outfielder as our RF with no real backup plan when management decides Moss can’t get the job done. Granted, he is still young at 25, but he didn’t hit when he got here and hasn’t shown any sign of improvement since his acquisition.
There's basically no chance...
…that they picked up Snelling with the idea of making him an everyday player. Even if they wanted to, his body couldn’t stand up to it.
Your causality chain is backwards. They didn’t trade McLouth because they wanted to promote McCutchen. They traded McLouth because they got a package they liked for him, and then they promoted McCutchen because he was the best option at AAA. If McCutchen had been hitting .220 with no power, they still would’ve traded McLouth, and then given the PT to Hinske or Salazar or someone like that.
Yeah, that’s true about Cutch. We wouldn’t have brought him up if he wasn’t ready and that did make the decision to trade McLouth easier. It just seems like any time you watch ESPN or FSN or read on the Internet about the McLouth trade, fans and people in the media are saying, “Well, the Pirates needed to make room for McCutchen because he was ready.” There was already room for him. It was Moss or Morgan that was going to get benched because McLouth was going to slider over to RF. It just bothers me that people and fans, especially outside of Pittsburgh, think we HAD to make room for Cutch by trading McLouth. As far as getting a package for McLouth that Huntington couldn’t refuse….I’m still not sold on that. I still think we could’ve gotten more for McLouth, perhaps even from another team, if we had waited longer, but we’ll see. This could end up being a good trade for the Pirates in two or three years and NH may come out smelling like a rose, but we really won’t know until then. I just hope NH knows what he is doing.
I like how you bring up the complaining about the McLouth trade (AGAIN!) and rant about it (AGAIN!) but then say, “there is no sense in talking about it”. Where I come from we have names for people like you: jagoff.
So you think 25 percent of the country is retarded!? Yea, totally. Atleast 25 percent. Well lets do a sample. There are 4 of us and you're retarded. Thats 25 percent. -South Park; Mystery of the Urinal Deuce.
by gorillakilla34 on Jun 12, 2009 1:33 AM EDT up reply actions
Good one....
Ya got me. HAHAHA. Is it that obvious? Only someone that is highly educated, like yourself, would rant about the same stupid things all the time, right?
So you think 25 percent of the country is retarded!? Yea, totally. Atleast 25 percent. Well lets do a sample. There are 4 of us and you're retarded. Thats 25 percent. -South Park; Mystery of the Urinal Deuce.
by gorillakilla34 on Jun 12, 2009 6:56 AM EDT up reply actions
Give it up, Mr. Gorilla
Lil’ Lumberco. will have to learn the hard way again.
BIP-centric
That is a correct assesment of our pitching staff. So he is 15 fielding run ahead of Young/Monroe/Hinske. How many RBI’s would they be ahead of him? Currently, he has 14. The team leader is Luigi with 29. That is a +1 differential today. If you make the move to Young/Hinske/Monroe, you hedge that they would generate more runs than allow based on the low RBI total of Moss. Granted, there is no real upside to Young/Monroe/Hinske past this year where you have an upside in Moss (which we havent seen yet).
I am not against having Moss in there. My point is that we may be better served with a more run producing back in the immediate standings.
you are assuming
Hinske/Young/Monroe will perform at or above the team lead for run producing?
Jason
The Hanging Curve
by poorboywilly on Jun 11, 2009 8:08 PM EDT up reply actions
Why are you using RBI like they say something useful about a hitter?
They’re mostly a function of context. We have real offensive metrics nowadays – we don’t need to try and draw conclusions from that kind of stuff anymore.
And more PT for Monroe? Seriously? Monroe was cooked and done two years ago. There’s nowhere to go but down.
I had expected something big for Moss this year and about to admit my error. Very surprised that he has struggled so badly. I don’t think we give up on him yet, and give him more decent chances to prove himself, but my visions of 280/340/480, 25 hr’s and 95 ribs have left the building.
I thought Moss would out-OPS Nyjer and Jack with 12-15 bombs. He hasn’t lived up to even the more pessimistic expectations. But he is still younger with more upside with the other 3 ML options, and also might have a future with the club. So he should be kept in at least as much as now.
And it is no small detail that Moss provides stellar defense in right field. Defense is more important for the Bucs than any other club because the pitchers generally don’t get strikeouts (meaning there are more balls in play).
I think
everyone knows my opinion on this, since I’ve stated it ad nauseum:
Let him play!!!! For the love of Mike, let him play!!!!
We’re not going to sniff .500 this year. Let’s see what we’ve got. Monroe is washed up (“warshed” up, for alla th’ yinzers), DY is a PH, fer chrissakes.
Moss HAS skills, what he doesn’t have right now is confidence. He doesn’t know from one day to the next if he’s in the lineup, IMO
Azza matter of fact, all of this is IMO.
But Jesus Becky, let the kid play – stretch him out, and see if he’s a 3rd or 4th. We know he’s got defensive skills.
’Nuff said by me.
Free your ass and your mind will follow.
So you’re going to blame his lack of production and strikeouts on not knowing if he’s going to be in the lineup from day to day? I’m not buying that.
Look, I’m not ready to give up on Moss either because like I’ve said before, he is still pretty young at 25 years old, but at the same time, you have to draw a line somewhere. We keep talking about Moss’ potential, how he has the potential to hit 15-20 HRs and hit a lot of doubles, but how long does it take for a guy to start showing that potential? He’s been an everyday player for us for a year now. Regardless of whether we are a winning team or a losing team, you don’t want a guy going out there and embarassing himself by going 0-for-4 every night with a couple of K’s. If he’s hitting .200 and still stuck on 1 HR a month from now, should we really continue to run him out there? That would just be embarassing and by that time, it would only get worse because he would be pressing so bad to try to do something. Also, as a major league team (regardless if you’re winning or losing), your job as the manager and as the front office is to put the best possible lineup out there every night in order to try to win games. Right now, putting Moss in the lineup does not give the Pirates their best of winning. Sorry, it just doesn’t. I understand both sides of the argument. Benching him will only decrease his confidence, but if you’re not producing, sorry. You can’t be run out there every single day.
Buy it, or don’t.
Makes no difference.
Vlad’s comments above illustrate it quite well. He does give us the best chance of winning.
And 90 games does not a season make.
Free your ass and your mind will follow.
by cocktailsfor2 on Jun 12, 2009 4:23 AM EDT up reply actions
If the 0-4 tonight...
…increases his chances of a 4-4 in 2011, then it was a worthwhile investment of time and effort.
Most player development people...
…are smart enough to understand that you sometimes need to take the mid or long view with young players.
If you toss all the solid prospects who don’t hit the ground running in their first couple of hundred ML AB, you’re going to squander an awful lot of talent.
Let me give you a test case. You’re in charge of a sixth-place team, during a season where you’ll end up losing 97 games. You’ve got a young third baseman, good reputation as a prospect. You call him up for a cup of coffee at 22, and he hits .206/.325/.294 (76 OPS+). Your incumbent starter isn’t anything too special (25, career .241/.302/.371 hitter in 500+ games), so you ship him off for some pitching over the offfseason and hand the job to the kid.
He has kind of a rough first half, hitting .214/.331/.388 and striking out in more than a third of his AB. He’s fielding OK, but he’s really flailing, and you’re on course for another last-place finish. Do you stick with him as a starter?
If you stuck with him, he hits even worse in the second half, posting a .168/.313/.350 line with the same ultra-high K rate. You lose 90+ games on the year again, and finish in the cellar. Do you keep the kid in the lineup for the next season, or cut bait?
In case it affects your decision:
You have a veteran IF backup on hand. He’s 32, and had a fairly nice four-or-five year run as a Tony Phillips-style supersub, playing some 2B, some 3B, and some OF. He pulled a few MVP votes, led the league in hits two years ago, and led the league in doubles and triples the year before that. Now gradually declining a bit, but still a capable veteran player with a .280 career BA.
You made your point
Anyway, we dont have any better options than Moss.
I see where you're going
But I think there’s a pretty good difference between a 22 year old and a 25 year old at the ML level. A player good enough to make the Majors at 22 is either a special talent or was promoted way too soon. The league is full of 25 year olds, a lot who can outhit Moss (who doesn’t have a particularly shining reputation as a prospect, either, as the person in your analogy does.) You’re comparing apples to oranges, IMO.
www.sixtyftsixin.com
by Sixty Feet, Six Inches on Jun 15, 2009 12:01 AM EDT up reply actions
It wasn't meant to be a linear comparison.
I just thought it was a good (and funny) illustration of the point that there are plenty of rookies who go through a rough patch at the start of their careers as regulars, but then develop into useful and productive players.
I could’ve made a big list of 25-year-olds instead, and while that might have had more practical application, this seemed like it might be more fun.
But yes, 6F6I is correct. Moss doesn’t have nearly the ceiling of the player from the example.
I can GUARANTEE you, mspirate,
Monroe won’t be a Pirate in 2010 or 2011.
So let Moss play. Either he will, or won’t be. But we’ll have found out for sure.
Free your ass and your mind will follow.
by cocktailsfor2 on Jun 12, 2009 5:23 PM EDT up reply actions
Definitely agree with you about Monroe. If Moss isn’t going to play, I want Young or Hinske out there. It’s a sticky situation because yes, Moss is young and maybe has some upside. We are going to be a losing team whether he hits .290 or .230 so I understand people like you that want him to play him all year just to see for sure if he’s going to be able to be a starter. Having said that, regardless if the team is winning or losing, the goal of every team is to try and win every game it plays. It’s the team’s responsibility to put the best possible lineup on the field that the team feels gives it the best possible chance to win night in and night out. Moss does NOT give this team the best possible chance to win every night going 0-for-4 and looking bad doing it. Also, July will be a full year for Moss as a Pirate, so he’s had adequate time to prove himself, and it seems that he is only regressing, not improving, which is what you want to see in young players. Like I said, I see both sides to the argument. Personally, I want to give the playing time to Moss until July. By the middle of July, if he has only gotten worse (hitting around .230 with still only one HR), I say let Delwyn Young start the rest of the season. Or platoon Hinske and Young. Is Young your longtime answer in RF? I doubt it, but he is only one year older than Moss at 26 so then again he could be. Are we going to win any more games with Young in there than with Moss? Not enough to matter, but probably a few. The point is to play the guy that is going to give the team the best possible chance of winning. Young has produced all year while Moss hasn’t, and the there wouldn’t be any power drop-off as both players have one HR (I can’t believe I just typed that). With Moss being such a disappointment thus far as a Pirate, I think the Pirates have to seriously think about signing a free agent outfielder next year with some power. Maybe they keep Hinske around for another year. I don’t know, but Tabata nor Gorkys Hernandez are going to be ready for the bigs next year, and Steve Pearce is, well, Steve Pearce, a career minor leaguer. So, I understand why some fans want to see Moss finish out the year to see for sure if he can do it or not, but he’s had a full year and he isn’t part of the best possible lineup in helping the team win.
It's not that you're wrong, exactly
because you’re right: From a competition standpoint, we SHOULD put the best possible combination out there every night. I question that that’s what JR is doing a lot of the time anyway, tho. He does some strange lineup stuff. But anyway, that might appease not only the fans but also the players, who would start wondering WTF was going on if we, say, benched Jack and played Bixler every day.
Where I think you’re off base is that a year of sporadic play is enough to make a judgment about a guy’s career, or that a guy should be considered a bust if he’s not tearing it up in the majors by age 25. Exhibit A for the hazards of giving up on a guy like that based on scant information: Mike Easler.
Granted, players like that are the exception, but I don’t exactly think we’re in a position to be jettisoning somewhat promising players because of one unremarkable season (during part of which the guy was hurt) spread out over two years.
Moss doesn’t need to be “tearing it up”. He just needs to be a productive outfielder. Hitting .230 with 1 HR as a RF isn’t going to help any team in the majors, and honestly, he would be on the bench if he played for anybody else but Pittsburgh. He’s not even putting the ball in play right now. You’re right in the fact that one down year shouldn’t be considered a bust. But, one year is enough for a guy to start showing his “potential” and showing why you traded one of the team’s best players for the guy. Since Moss was acquired from the Red Sox, the word “potential” has come up in every conversation about him. Well, when is he going to start showing that potential? By the time he’s 27 or 28? He was a fourth outfielder in Boston and personally, I think that’s all he is. I just don’t think if by the middle of next month, he’s even worse than he is right now, that we can continue to start him. If he could just hit .270 with 10-15 HR, than I would say we should keep playing him. But he’s on pace to hit .240 with 2 HR this year. He’s not helping the team in any way with those kind of numbers. I just think a year is enough time to at least start showing the “potential” that everybody associates with Moss, and he’s not showing any of it.
It's tough to watch sometimes....
especially when he doesn’t produce anything in high pressure situations. I think, like Cocktails says, he needs to be out there every game. He either needs to prove he belongs or that he doesn’t but starting him every other game isn’t going to allow him to find the part of his game he is missing.
JR is the key to this whole situation here. Moss should maybe be moved down to the 7 hole to relieve a little pressure from him in the order. What Moss doesn’t need is all the rest he gets.
What you need to understand is finding out about the current pieces is currently more important to PBC than winning a few extra games by starting Hinske or Young. Maybe if he is given an actual shot, instead of a halfassed one, he may actually find a grove and confidence then maybe we will see him live up to his potential.
Moss, barring injury, needs to play every game the rest of the season. Whether it be against an all-star lefty or some scrub he should have his shot to either keep the job or lose the job based on every day performance.
So you think 25 percent of the country is retarded!? Yea, totally. Atleast 25 percent. Well lets do a sample. There are 4 of us and you're retarded. Thats 25 percent. -South Park; Mystery of the Urinal Deuce.
by gorillakilla34 on Jun 13, 2009 3:26 PM EDT up reply actions
“He would be on the bench if he was playing for anybody other than Pittsburgh.”
It’s a bit extreme of a statement. I think he could start in other bad clubs like Washington, but I see what you mean. On a contender, he’s be on the bench. He was on the bench in Boston.
Well, yeah. The difference is that those teams have better options in RF. We don’t. Bay has Bay, Ellsbury and Drew in the OF. Last year they had an even better OF of Ramirez, Ellsbury and Drew. They’re all much more productive than Moss, and while they’re not exactly spring chickens, they’re veteran players that are big contributors to an offense. Hinske/Monroe/Young aren’t. They’re veteran players that are good pieces for the bench.
www.sixtyftsixin.com
by Sixty Feet, Six Inches on Jun 15, 2009 12:21 AM EDT up reply actions
Ok, I agree somewhat, but why did you include Young as being a “veteran player”? He is only one year older (26) than Moss. He’s still pretty young. Young may be our starting RF for years to come. I doubt it because he doesn’t really have any power either, but you never know. Right now, Young IS a better option than Moss. A .356 hitter is a better option than a .243 hitter. They have shown the same power with 1 HR each. I realize Young is no Willie Mays out there in RF, but we need hitting! Young doesn’t belong in the same group as Hinske/Monroe.
You make a faulty assumption as well.
I criticised Vlad for his false analogy, so now I’ll criticise you for your faulty logic as well.
The goal of a team that’s out of contention isn’t necessarily to put the best players as of RIGHT NOW on the field. Sometimes, you have to let a veteran player sit in order to make room for a prospect with upside. Sometimes a declining vet like Hinske has to sit in order for a younger player to play enough to see if they can reach their potential. It may result in more losses for the team THAT YEAR, but it can pay dividends in later years if you get the growing pains of the young players out of the way early.
Let’s assume Andrew McCutchen didn’t have a hot start to his ML career. We’ll say he sputters out of the gate and over 3 months hits .210/.278/.300, plays awful defense and generally just sucks.
The right move in that situation is STILL to play him every day in CF instead of doing something drastic like benching him, moving Nyjmo to center and putting Hinske or Young in left full time.
Why? Because you have to see what the younger player’s got.
We know what Hinske, Monroe and Young will give is. It’s solid, but unspectacular. We can look at their track record and see that they’re not going to be world-beaters.
Moss, on the other hand, doesn’t have a REAL track record yet. It’s as simple as trying to see what he’s got.
The prospect called up in my hypothetical doesn’t have to be a top guy like McCutchen, either. It could be Gorkys in a few years. It works for Moss now. The principle is the same. Allowing for developmental time is more important to the team’s future than desperately trying to squeeze a few more wins out of a losing team this year and benching someone who has a chance at being good in order to do it.
www.sixtyftsixin.com
by Sixty Feet, Six Inches on Jun 15, 2009 12:16 AM EDT up reply actions
What offensive skills has he shown?
Outside of a two weeks stint in May?
Nobody looks good...
…if you arbitrarily cross out the parts of the year where they play the best.
If you scratch out all the games where Freddy got a hit, he’s totally hitless!
My question is valid
I am touting body of work. Of Moss’s body of work, the only flash he has show (to justify upside) is the two weeks in May. The rest of his body of work projects at best and average player. The Freddy analogy is irrelevant because Freddy’s body of work is consistent. Freddy is not a .300+ hitter with one two week streak.
"Freddy's body of work is consistent"?
Bull shit.
Freddy’s monthly OPS splits for the last two seasons:
MAR/APR08: .537
MAY08: .636
JUN08: .532
JUL08: .700
AUG08: .829
SEP/OCT08: .819
MAR/APR09: .943
MAY09: .832
JUN09: .567 (to date)
Nine months’ worth of performance… and 88% of the time, he experienced either a 100-point OPS drop or 100-point OPS gain in the passage from one month to the next.
Overlooking for a moment your questionable methodology in cleaning the data to compensate for Moss’s injury, you’re talking about a sample of four months. There was nothing in the first four months’ of Freddy’s performance in ’08 to indicate that he would be a productive hitter going forward, and yet he did. Thus, you see the problem with drawing wild conclusions based on a limited data set.
Where are injuries quantified with data
If we only use math and the great OPS as the measure of a ballplayer, how do we quantify injury?
I just find it remarkably convenient...
…that according to your sampling, he got injured on the first day of the month, and made a full recovery overnight on the last day of that same month.
You are correct
That is an incorrect assumption. How would you quantify injuries or will the math bear them out? How much OPS is good enough sampling? You did leave out Freddy’s OPS from ‘05-’07….
I just pulled Freddy's last two years...
…because I was looking for an analogue for Moss, and Moss has only been on the team for two years.
I don’t think that there is at this point any good way to quantify the impact of injuries. That’s why you still need scouts, y’know?
Why does everyone say we wont sniff contending this year
We are only 5 games out of first place and 4.5 out of the wild card. 21 of our 28 upcoming games are against teams that are sub .500. If we go 16-12 in that stretch we reach .500 at the All-Star break. I dont care who you are, unless you have an LA Dodger type caliber team running away with it, .500 contends – especially since the division leader in our division only has 5 more wins than we do.
Are we saying collectively that it doesnt matter if we contend this year? The whole point of this thread is to address a glaring offensive deficiency at a position. We all seem to think that if we run Hinske/Monroe/Young out there it is the equivalent of sticking the nose picker out in RF because the coach says he has to play. We will not all of a sudden lose numerous games (that Moss would theoretically win with his glove) by putting someone out there with a better bat. Besides, you are not as exposed in RF as you are at 2B or SS. We can actually count games where Young and Vasquez have cost us wins.
My whole point is that we increase the production in our batting order including Hinske and Monroe in the lineup. This would not be a permanent move, but it would give Moss time to hit the cage and maybe come into a game late as defensive replacement. We desperately need power in the lineup and not a guarnteed out.
We say that the team won't contend...
…because:
a) We’re behind five other teams for the division title, and eight other teams for the wild card.
b) We’re significantly less talented than the majority of the teams in front of us.
c) We’re likely to shop several of our current starters at the deadline.
Is it possible that we will, at some point, get hot and temporarily poke our nose up above .500 for a week? Sure. If that happens, will we actually be a legitimate contender? Of course not.
You forgot
d) Our record against the current first-place team in our division: 0-5
e) We haven’t played the Giants yet, but I’ll say this: They are without a doubt a better team than us.
f) Hell, our record against the current LAST PLACE team in our division: 3-6
www.sixtyftsixin.com
by Sixty Feet, Six Inches on Jun 15, 2009 12:34 AM EDT up reply actions
Also, on the Moss v. Monroe question...
…I’m compelled to point out that Moss had a higher OPS than Monroe in both 2007 and 2008, and despite his struggles this year is only 10 points behind him in 2008.
Even if you start with the highly dubious premise that we can’t afford to carry Moss in the lineup, I fail to see how replacing him with a guy of demonstrably lower overall ability who’s struggling just as badly this year could possibly improve matters.
I agree with your statistical analysis
The underlying point of my post is that we need a power bat in the lineup. Moss has had 323 ABs since joining the Pirates (158 in ’08; 165 in ’09). Monroe has had 72 this year. This is the right split due to Moss being a prospect and Monroe being a role player.
Their OPB/SLG/OPS numbers are similar this year – so no argument there:
Monroe – .282 .375 .657
Moss – .295 .352 .647
All things being equal offensively (even for the struggling Monroe) you have the same offensive player in Monroe with 93 less ABs. Even if he is terrilble in the field, he will net out better than Moss given the AB’s and give you more power numbers overall based on Monroe’s precedent.
With all of that being said, I do NOT advocate the change if it means the difference in .500.
Two Open Question:
1. We need pop in the lineup and could giving more playing time to Monroe make us more of a contender SHOULD we hover at .500 around the break.
2. Do we need to get Moss some success (whether it be in the cage during a game, fake injury for AAA assignement {ala Donnie Veal}, outright demotion to AAA), make him more accountable or just keep riding him out there against every righty and hope he breaks out? He has the equivalent of a half major league season with the PBC (323 AB’s over ’08 & ’09).
Wait, what?
If they’re putting up the same line this year, and Moss has outhit Monroe in the recent past, and Monroe is in clear physical decline (as he is), then why does it follow that Monroe will “net out better than Moss”? It would seem that the reverse would be true: that Moss will improve as he approaches his physical peak, while Monroe will decline as he heads away from his.
Furthermore, you seem to believe that a player who provides X runs’ worth of value from HR is worth more than a player who provides X runs’ worth of value through any other means. This is incorrect: Runs are runs, regardless of the form they take.
I am taking this year for this year
The numbers are for this year only. Monroe is not better than Moss overall, but he has better numbers in 93 fewer AB’s.
For a player with as small a 2009 sample as Monroe's...
…a difference 10 points of OPS is less than one hit. One bleeder that did (or didn’t) fall in, one cannon shot that was (or wasn’t) caught by the shortstop.
You’re mighty confident to stake such a bold claim on a difference of one hit.
One hit, 2 more HR and 1 more RBI in 93 less AB's
Moss had 93 more chances to hit a “bleeder” to tie Monroe in OPS.
Yes, Monroe's value (such as it is)...
…is concentrated more heavily in HR than Moss’s is.
I still don’t understand why you think that’s important, though. Ten runs’ worth of doubles are worth just as much as ten runs’ worth of home runs: Ten runs.
It’s like the old science class question about whether a hundred pounds of feathers weighs more than a hundred pounds of bricks.
A common piece of baseball wisdom:
If your bench has better numbers than your starters, it’s not a sign that you’re benching all your best players. It’s a sign that you’re using your bench correctly.
Small sample sizes do funny things. After his first game as a Pirate, Andrew McCutchen had a .500 average. Are you in shock and awe that he hasn’t maintained that pace? Of course not, because that would be a ridiculous expectation.
Just remember. Small sample sizes do funny things. Things like making Craig Monroe seem like anything more than a role player.
www.sixtyftsixin.com
by Sixty Feet, Six Inches on Jun 15, 2009 12:44 AM EDT up reply actions
Once again
Why is it so important to you that we win 65 games instead of 63? Does this really look like a contending team to you? Seriously? You’re really Littlefield, aren’t you?
My point: There are long-term benefits to being really bad as opposed to just bad. We have absolutely nothing to lose by playing Moss full or most of the time, except games, in which case maybe we’ll move up from the No. 6 pick to the No. 3 in the draft. Tell me how this is a bad thing.
Too competitive to just write off the year
I think we have pieces and may have a power bat that could steal some ABs from an under achiever.
Let me make sure I get what you're saying, then maybe you will too.
You’re saying CRAIG MONROE will make us a championship caliber team… CRAIG MONROE.
There’s a reason 31 other teams ignored him as even a non-roster invitee to Spring Training.
I think he was ignored by at least 43 teams
as I never heard that any team in Japan was interested in the slightest.
nail +head = you.
Free your ass and your mind will follow.
by cocktailsfor2 on Jun 13, 2009 12:30 AM EDT up reply actions
Where did I ever say he could make us a champion?
My opinion has been swayed. Let’s run Moss out there as we have and re-evaluate at the end of the year. It’s not like we are going to contend and he has to either sink or swim.
Monroe's defense...
will make his value in the minus column even if he had an OPS of .850 the rest of the year.
He is not that much of a liability
If he gets one more start a week.
I think this team has contending parts
Monroe is not a replacement for Moss. My point is that Monroe has produced the same offensive numbers than Moss has with 93 fewer ABs. Just because everyone on earth thinks that Monroe is washed up, his offensive numbers this year prove better than Moss. We can talk trends/age/upside, but the bottom line is that Monroe has better power numbers than Moss with 93 fewer AB’s.
Monroe will concede runs on defense and there is no question about that. I tend to think that it would not be as much as you all believe. My point is that maybe we should give Monroe a few more AB’s – that’s it! My other point is that Moss is not trending to 3rd/4th given his body of work to date (which is only 1/2 of a major league season – 323 AB’s).
I am fine with running Moss out there every day. I just dont think we are as far away today from contending as everyone else on the board. We are only 5 games out…..
"I just don't think we are as far away today from contending ..."
Good God. You remind me of somebody … oh yeah:
“It can’t be reasoned with. … And it absolutely will not stop, ever.”
The reason we're only five games out...
…is that it’s only mid-June. Give us a couple more months, and it’ll be up to 10.
I do not disagree with anything you guys are saying
You are very persuasive in your points. I do agree that Moss should be trotted out there every day. My only point is that Monroe would offer more power than Moss, yet the math that is trotted out shows that Moss will be equal to Monroe in the fact that he will allow fewer runs with his glove. Noted. Let’s revisit at the end of the season.
And I still think we have 70 wins in us
and if we put it together could keep it interesting…..
right now
our actual W/L percentage of .467 has us on pace for 75-76 wins while our pythagorean W/L is exactly 30-30 meaning we’ve played (very very roughly) like a .500 team. encouraging, but as the front office has repeated we’re not aiming for .500. don’t figure on this continuing, especially if/when we start shedding veteran players.
please don’t take this as me arguing that the pirates are a contending team this year. i happen to not have much optimism for this collection of players. these are, as they say, just the facts.
If you want to be techincal...
…then as of this morning, our Pyth was actually a tiny fraction above .500, in that we’d scored one more run than we’d allowed.
A nice moral victory, at least.
“If you’re not going to win 90 games, you might as well lose 90 games.” – Billy Beane.
70 wins would not get us to the postseason. 70 wins would not even give us a winning record. Tell me, why in the hell should we aim for 70 wins?
www.sixtyftsixin.com
by Sixty Feet, Six Inches on Jun 15, 2009 12:47 AM EDT up reply actions
But...Monroe had that Amazing 2 HR game in the beginning of April!
How can we not play him every day in the 4 hole given that one good game? Ignore the fact that he hasn’t even played at a Triple-A level for the other 31 games he played.
What's with all the talk
about Monroe performing the same as Moss but in 93 fewer AB’s? Maybe his counting stats are in the same range, but his OPS isn’t something that will inevitably go up with more AB’s. 93 more AB’s is likely to put him… about where he is now.
The sad reality
The pirates outfield roster is full of fourth outfielders and that being said Moss should play. We have only one outfielder who is capable of becoming a true five tool player. Morgan is a poor re-incarnation of Pierre, Polona, Milky Cabrera etc…, he can not hit and does not draw enough walks to utilize his speed. Monroe and Hinskie are the stop-gaps who were meant to be the fourth outfielders. The problem is that Moss and Morgan are AT-BEST fourth outfielders. The pirates would be in competition for the central division if they had two corner outfielders who were even slighty below major league average. Morgan does play good defense, but that does not make up for his 270 batting average and low OBP. I do not even know how it is possible for Moss to have such a ridiculously low amount of RBI’s. I know Moss had off-season surgery and maybe the pirates are to blame for rushing him back before he was prepared. This could have killed his confidence and ruined his oppurtunity with the Pirates. The Pirates may has well play Moss due to lack of alternatives, but if the right situation comes up he should be traded for a player who has talent but needs a change of scenery! I just hope he has not killed all his trade value. I really would like to see the guy succeed in a Pirate uniform, but I am really skeptical right now!
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
Related FanPosts on Bucs Dugout
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
SBNation.com Recent Stories
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Padres just scratch their heads as losing streak reaches 10
- The Juice: Marlins get off the deck, stun Braves in extras
- Papelbon's implosion, comment, make Red Sox want to scream
- Rangers fall after Young gets touchy feely with third base coach
- Tony La Russa vs. Colby Rasmus: Who ya throwing overboard?
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
