No! Yargh! Pirates! -- Jason Jaramillo
by Androgen Jar Jimmy on Jul 8, 2009 1:03 PM EDT
Email
PrintLast year, he was the #10 prospect in the Phillies farm system. This year, while Ryan Doumit is injured, he's the starting catcher for the Pittsburgh Pirates.
He's from Racine, Wisconsin. From what I can tell on their Website, the biggest attraction in Racine is the Laurel Clark Memorial Fountain. Other notables from Racine include suffragist Olympia Brown and adult film star Max Hardcore, who is currently in prison for distributing obscene materials.
According to Baseball Prospectus' seven-year forecast, he'll hit six home runs per year until he hits age 30 in 2013 and he starts to slow down. Right now, in his rookie season, he ranks 23rd among all major league catchers, better than 28th place Ronny Paulino, for whom he was traded last December. Ronny Paulino has been traded twice since then, from the Phillies to the Giants, and then to the Marlins. Consider that Jaramillo costs, $0.40 million this year and Paulino costs $0.44 million. In that trade, the Pirates seem to have gotten a better player for less money.
He has an OPS+ of 94, three home runs, eleven doubles, and one stolen base in forty-five games."He’s filling in great," left-handed pitcher Donald Veal said. "We haven’t missed a beat with the pitchers. He’s getting hits, driving in runs, helping the staff and just doing a tremendous job behind the plate. We have no complaints." -- The Journal Times, Jason's hometown paper
By the end of July, Ryan Doumit should be back from rehabilitation. What happens to Jason then? Rob Neyer says it might make sense for the Pirates to trade Doumit now and let Jaramillo have the job for a while until Tony Sanchez is ready.
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.
99 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Poop on Rob Neyer
Doumit won’t bring a great return because of his injury history. At some point, the endless refrain of “trade this guy and that guy” just becomes making trades for the sake of making trades.
He May Not Bring Two Top Prospects
But what good is he doing to the team right now? Why do we need his four-year contract when we have a decent catcher to replace him and Tony Sanchez might be in the big show sooner than you think?
I think we might as well get what we can for him. He’s not doing any good here.
by Androgen Jar Jimmy on Jul 8, 2009 1:15 PM EDT up reply actions
Think About 2010 and 2013
Why would we want to have a 32-year-old oft-injured catcher on the team in 2013? Doumit is not our future. He can either be taking up space on the 2013 team, or we can trade him now. The market is about to heat up, and Doumit isn’t going to be more valuable next year when he’s one year older.
by Androgen Jar Jimmy on Jul 8, 2009 1:32 PM EDT up reply actions
I don’t think you can sit here and say that a players value is going to decline every year after he enters his physical prime at 27. Not to mention that the value of a player is different for every team depending on their needs at the time.
DING DING DING!
Way to look beyond statistics and into reality, while at the same time not losing sight of the statistics! You win, sir!
www.sixtyftsixin.com
by Sixty Feet, Six Inches on Jul 8, 2009 3:36 PM EDT up reply actions
Doumits Value Is Already Declining
No one is saying that all players precipitously decline after age 27. You’re flailing at a strawman.
Ryan Doumit specifically, however, is likely to be less valuable next year than this year. People typically don’t become less fragile with age. They become more fragile. Catchers with a history of health problems don’t suddenly become supermen at age 30. They usually become washed up.
by Androgen Jar Jimmy on Jul 8, 2009 3:55 PM EDT up reply actions
I think there's a decent chance...
…that at some point in the next few years Doumit will have an almost-healthy season, if only by random chance. At which point, we should be able to do a better job of maximizing his trade value.
Honestly, I think Doumit is about as fragile as he can get already.
I agree. His trade value isn’t as high as it could be right now with him injured. We should keep him at least one more year, and if he’s healthy and playing well this time next year, that would be the time to trade him. I don’t see NH moving Doumit until he can get back what he sees as fair price for a power-hitting, switch-hitting catcher. When healthy, Doumit is one of the best offensive catchers in baseball.
False choice, sir.
“He can either be taking up space on the 2013 team, or we can trade him now.”
Or we could hold on to him for this year because he’d get us fuck-all in a trade. Trading him now is selling low, plain and simple. Then we could trade him next year or the year after.
He WILL be more valuable next year. Nobody cares about the age of a player if he’s producing and they only want him as a rent-a-player.
You make this fallacy yet again, and I see you make it a lot: you assume every team is rebuilding, and thus they all want to build around youth like the Pirates. The opposite is true. When you’re in the hunt for the playoffs, you want to BUY veteran talent, not sell it. That’s why the Yankees always trade their top prospects: they aren’t stupid, they’re in contention. And most years, it gets them to the playoffs.
Which do you think is more valuable to a team that needs a catcher for a year or two? A 28 year old Ryan Doumit who’s coming off of an injury that’s sidelined him all year and is notorious for sapping power until fully rehabilitated, or a 29 year old Ryan Doumit that’s hitting home runs again?
www.sixtyftsixin.com
by Sixty Feet, Six Inches on Jul 8, 2009 3:35 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Exactly
I don’t think anyone in New York was up in arms when they signed a now 29 year old Mark Teixeira. I would imagine most players probably have about 4 or 5 years that you could consider their “prime”.
If You're Comparing The Pirates To The Yankees
Then you’re lost.
by Androgen Jar Jimmy on Jul 8, 2009 4:07 PM EDT up reply actions
Youre missing the point
The point is players are going to have a few good years while they are IN THEIR PRIME! Also, who is to say that Posada isnt gonna blow out his knee tonight and a team like, the Yankees, are not going to come looking for a guy like Doumit.
You’re not looking at it from both perspectives. You’re only looking at it from the perspective of a small market team that builds within and cant throw away money every time they have a problem.
Upon further thought
I guess that would be a bad scenario since that would reinforce your idea of trading Doumit now. While I’m not opposed to that happening, it would have to be a scenario similar to the one above and would have to bring in a player like (to continue this scenario) Phil Hughes.
Otherwise, there is nothing wrong with shopping a 29 year old that could still help teams out, and has a team friendly contract.
And...
I was comparing relative age of the players not the teams.
I'm not comparing anyone to the Yankees.
In fact, that’s the exact opposite of what I’m doing. I’m actually CONTRASTING the teams. Way to use your reading comprehension skills.
Speaking of logical fallacies, how about quoting out of context?
www.sixtyftsixin.com
by Sixty Feet, Six Inches on Jul 8, 2009 9:59 PM EDT up reply actions
Well, I don’t think he’ll be as tradeable next year as he is this year. The market is unusually hot this year, due to more teams than usual being in the hunt.
by Androgen Jar Jimmy on Jul 8, 2009 3:50 PM EDT up reply actions
You're insane.
The market may be hot, but Doumit’s stock is lower right now than it has ever been or will ever be. It doesn’t matter how hot the stock market is – a penny stock is still worthless.
There’s a reason we’ve heard absolutely ZERO rumors about Doumit: nobody wants a catcher that’s returning from a long DL stint. Even for a premium hitting catcher like Doumit, that’s too much uncertainty.
www.sixtyftsixin.com
by Sixty Feet, Six Inches on Jul 8, 2009 3:57 PM EDT up reply actions
hopefully he can come back strong… so we trade him and Wilson to Boston for Clay Buchholz or Michael Bowden and a shit load more of prospects… i think the pirates are going to unload everyone at the deadline this year…Doumit, Wilson to Boston… Capps to Tampa Bay for Reid Brignac and others, Ad LaRoche to NY Mets for Jon Niese, Adam Bostick, and Low Level Prospect, and Sanchez to Colorado with Snell for 2B Eric Young Jr, and 3 Prospects…and maby even Maholm or Duke gets moved too…. this will get this team to were they need to be next year and ready to make a run in 2011….1. McCutchen CF 2. E. Young 2B 3. L. Milledge LF 4. P. Alvarez 1B 5. Andy LaRoche 3B 6. Jose Tabata RF 7. R. Brignac SS 8. Tony Sanchez C……Buchholz, Lincoln, Morton, Ohlendorf, Niese, Duke, Maholm that gives us some good options to use if maholm and duke arent traded.
A lot of those scenarios...
…seem unrealistic to me. Tampa wasn’t willing to include Brignac in the Bay talks, but they’ll deal him for Capps? The Mets weren’t willing to move Niese for anyone last year, but now we get Niese AND other stuff for LaRoche?
I guess you never know with trades, but I wouldn’t bet the ranch on any of those happening.
Doumit still hasn’t gotten a hit in 11 AB’s in the GCL and wasn’t tearing it up before he got hurt. Not that the GCL stats mean anything, but my point is he needs to play really well before he’ll bring the best value, injury history or not. I like Jamarillo though and wouldn’t mind it.
RIP NATE. RIP TONY PLUSH.
"I'D BE A CHEF"
-TONY PLUSH
I Don't Think He's Getting Better
He’s at the point in his career where he is what he is. I strongly doubt that he’ll be better next year.
The trade market is about to heat up. More teams are in pennant races than usual. Demand for major leaguers is high — even for barely passable major leaguers with bad contracts. Someone might actually want Ryan Doumit on their team in the next three weeks. After that, his value declines until he retires.
by Androgen Jar Jimmy on Jul 8, 2009 1:56 PM EDT up reply actions
Dude you are way overvaluing Doumit
Why would someone want a guy who just locked down catcher and spends more time on the DL than actually on the field? We would be making a trade for the sake of a trade with Doumit.
Because I’d rather have a middling prospect than an gimpy catcher with a long contract.
by Androgen Jar Jimmy on Jul 8, 2009 2:18 PM EDT up reply actions
Let's Look At It The Other Way
Why should we keep Doumit on the team?
by Androgen Jar Jimmy on Jul 8, 2009 2:20 PM EDT up reply actions
Because he’ll be a more valuable trade target when he’s producing stats and not sidelined for the majority of the season.
www.sixtyftsixin.com
by Sixty Feet, Six Inches on Jul 8, 2009 3:37 PM EDT up reply actions
Because he's likely to be a valuable asset in 2010.
At which point, if we still want to trade him, we’ll be able to get more for him than we would if we dumped him for nothing right now.
PROTIP: The trade market heats up toward the deadline every year. We could ALSO trade Doumit next year when he’ll be more valuable.
www.sixtyftsixin.com
by Sixty Feet, Six Inches on Jul 8, 2009 3:38 PM EDT up reply actions
doumit
or, you could trade doumit now and kiss the next three seasons away, cutch cant do it by himself and wtih la roche getting traded this year, milledge still on the fence on whether he can pull his damn head together, he is your only legit power threat in our lineup. if he was playing the whole first half of the year, it would be a lot different i beleive… you hang on to him move him to first because jarmillo isnt the answer either or theywouldnt have drafted a catcher 4th overall.. you keep doumit because you need to keep a player like him a switch hitting catcher/ 1b who could also play right if need be, he wont get anything on the market because of his injuries, when hes healthy he produces for the pirates, try selling that to a contender for the AL which he would be the DH for saying well hey if hes healthy hes a hell of a hitter but thats a big if… hold on to him hes a solid player and once they move him to first base he will get rid of his injuries
CITY OF CHAMPYINZ
Moving him to first won't help.
In fact, it’ll make him look worse to teams. His bat at first is below average, and teams are always apprehensive about moving a converted catcher back behind the plate.
I’m not against the idea of giving him a few starts at both first and right, though. It would showcase his versatility for teams in the hunt for him.
Also, he gets injured no matter where he plays. People assume it’s because he’s a catcher, but his most major injury last year came from diving for a ball in right field.
www.sixtyftsixin.com
by Sixty Feet, Six Inches on Jul 8, 2009 4:01 PM EDT up reply actions
A switch-hitter who can play 1B and RF sounds great.
I don’t get what this has to do with Doumit, though. He can’t play either position, and actually suffered a fairly serious injury the last time he was getting regular OF PT.
If we start using him there, teams will start to see him as a guy who can’t catch, and their interest (and bids) will drop accordingly.
his bat
oh you mean, below average like adam la roche below average? and la roche is getting looks for how poor of a clutch hitter he is… movin him would help, im not looking for trade, im looking for a way to make the club better, he is a proven .300 hitter where as la roche is probably around .260… keep the platoon until sanchez is ready then bring him up and trade jarmillo or diaz… so you trade doumit and get what a single a pitcher and a middle infielder that goes to triple a that is unproven at the big leagues… that is dumb and bad baseball
CITY OF CHAMPYINZ
Adam LaRoche is a better hitter than Doumit.
LaRoche is a career .830 OPS guy. Doumit’s had an OPS above LaRoche’s career average exactly once in five seasons.
And for the record (again):
Adam LaRoche, career, bases empty: .831 OPS
Adam LaRoche, career, men on base: .827 OPS
His “clutch” issues this year are a sample-size fluke, nothing more.
Although It's An Unequal Comparison
Since Doumit plays the most difficult position, and LaRoche plays the easiest.
by Androgen Jar Jimmy on Jul 8, 2009 7:03 PM EDT up reply actions
He was talking about moving Doumit to 1B...
…and saying that Doumit would be a better offensive 1B than LaRoche.
If you’re comparing Doumit-the-offensive-catcher to LaRoche-the-offensive-1B, then that’s obviously a totally different thing.
Thank you.
There is no such thing as clutch. Even if you define it as late inning hits where your team needs runs immediately. Its called luck. Look at most numbers, there is no difference.
There isn't such
thing as clutch but I fully believe that someone can be non-clutch much like if someone get stage fright of presses too much in a “clutch” situation.
There ARE non-clutch hitters.
They just tend to get weeded out of the population in high school, if not sooner. By the time guys reach the majors, everybody is of approximately equal clutchness.
Actually, Adam LaRoche is a perfectly average first baseman in every regard.
www.sixtyftsixin.com
by Sixty Feet, Six Inches on Jul 8, 2009 10:04 PM EDT up reply actions
average
so, you would like to keep an average player such as la roche to build a team? you trade nate and morgan before la roche, an average player? you and glass are wrong
CITY OF CHAMPYINZ
I think you may have inadvertently replied to the wrong post.
Since none of the people in this thread are saying anything like the point to which you’re apparently trying to reply.
Still don’t like trading Doumit, because his price is currently in the cellar. You gotta hope he can play half a season healthy next year if you want any value. On the other hand, the time to trade Sanchez was before the back injury because he was playing very well.
You are correct, sir!
Sell high and buy low.
Doumit is low now. Don’t even think about trading him until his value increases.
Unless You Think That Doumit's Value Is Only Going To Be Lower Next Year
When he hurts himself again.
by Androgen Jar Jimmy on Jul 8, 2009 5:17 PM EDT up reply actions
Doumit’s value could either go down a little bit, or up considerably.
The comparable situation is Xavier Nady. He’s always been very injury-prone – but he had a monster first half last year, and all of a sudden teams forgot about his history and we got a great return.
On the other hand, an example of a bad sell-low is Washington trading Milledge.
by Gorkys n' Beans on Jul 8, 2009 5:30 PM EDT up reply actions
Lets not forget
That contending teams (Large and Small market) are not necessarily looking to trade for players they plan on having around in the future. For instance, the Brewers traded LaPorta last year (who by all indications was going to be a big part of their future) to bring in a guy that they had to know they couldnt sign, because they thought they were on the cusp of being a playoff team. If the Brewers had subscribed to your Small market theory they would not have made the playoffs last year.
The point is that you really have as much idea as I do about what contending front office types are thinking in the middle of the season. Because Doumits age adjusted value doesnt fit in to the current Pirates plan does not mean that is the way he will be viewed by others. Let the man get healthy and with some luck we can rob a desperate team next year.
Which I don't.
So it’s not really a worthwhile consideration.
Even if Doumit WERE hurt again next year, it wouldn’t really affect his trade value at all, since it’s already minimal until he successfully returns from his current injury. There’s no value to lose in the interim.
I Guess We're Just Having Competing Predictions Here
I think he’s likely to get hurt again. You don’t. And to be honest, I don’t think either of us has much to base those predictions on. It’s just the way these things seem to us.
Billy Beene is working on a method to predict injuries. But we don’t have that method yet. So we can just guess. And to me, Doumit seems like an injury-prone guy. To you, he doesn’t. And that’s fine.
by Androgen Jar Jimmy on Jul 8, 2009 7:06 PM EDT up reply actions
I actually think he's fairly likely to get hurt at any given time.
I just don’t see a lot of downside in waiting to make a deal. He’s got minimal value now until he comes back and shows he’s healthy, and if he comes back and then gets hurt again next April, we’ll only be back in the same position that we are right now.
Downside
I think the downside to waiting to make a deal is that every day older he gets, the more likely he is to get injured again, possibly for the final time.
by Androgen Jar Jimmy on Jul 8, 2009 7:19 PM EDT up reply actions
That’s a strawman argument. No one is saying Doumit is not injury-prone. The point being made is that waiting for him to play again is a low downside (he’s worth next to nothing, same as now), high upside (Nady 2008) roll of the dice. I don’t know if he’ll get seriously injured by then or not, that’s why it’s a gamble.
by Gorkys n' Beans on Jul 8, 2009 7:52 PM EDT up reply actions
I guess I just don’t believe that being injured or just coming off of an injury seriously hurts someone’s tradeability. We just acquired Lastings Milledge in the midst of his rehab.
by Androgen Jar Jimmy on Jul 8, 2009 8:21 PM EDT up reply actions
The Nats didn’t get anywhere close to good value for Milledge. That deal would support the waiting approach, not the hurry and make a move approach.
by Gorkys n' Beans on Jul 8, 2009 8:49 PM EDT up reply actions
I’m more apt to believe that the reason why the Nats didn’t get full value for Milledge isn’t because he was injured, but because the Nats are dumb.
by Androgen Jar Jimmy on Jul 8, 2009 9:03 PM EDT up reply actions
The two aren't unconnected.
The Nats didn’t get full value for Milledge in part because they traded him when he was injured, after a slow start. The dumbness of the Nats manifested itself in their decision to trade him at that time, for the package they got, rather than holding him until he rebuilt some of his value.
Good Points
I read the other day about how the Nats said that under no circumstances are they trading Adam Dunn. They just seem hell-bent to acquire and hold onto slightly-past-prime players. They’re building their team around, well, Derek Bell types.
So that’s all to say that I think that the Nats would have traded Milledge for Nyjer even if Milledge were healthy.
by Androgen Jar Jimmy on Jul 8, 2009 9:57 PM EDT up reply actions
And Next Year He'll Be Slightly Past His Prime
A team like the Nats has no need for veterans.
by Androgen Jar Jimmy on Jul 9, 2009 11:00 AM EDT up reply actions
No, he won't.
27-30 is generally regarded as a player’s “prime”, for the purpose of aging curves.
If you think he’s likely to decline precipitiously at age 33 or whatever, sure… but he’ll be off the books by then anyway.
So Like I Said
Next year he’ll be thirty, and slightly past his prime.
by Androgen Jar Jimmy on Jul 9, 2009 1:05 PM EDT up reply actions
No, 27-30 typically IS prime.
31 would be past-prime.
And don’t keep trying to move the goalposts. You also described him as a “Derek Bell type”, which is so far beyond ludicrous that words fail me.
I DIdn't Say That Dunn Was Derek Bell
I said that the Nats are building their team around Derek Bell types — veterans who were never really that good to begin with.
by Androgen Jar Jimmy on Jul 9, 2009 2:12 PM EDT up reply actions
And you said that...
…in the context of Dunn. Which is wrong.
We signed Bell for his age-32 season. At age 31, he had a 98 OPS+, with a big second-half fade. The year before that, he had a 66 OPS+ and lost his job as a starter. He was already obviously, demonstrably cooked at the time we signed him.
The Nats signed Dunn for his age-29 and -30 seasons, at a time when he was coming off five consecutive years with 40+ HR. The difference should be obvious.
If I Implied that Dunn=Bell Then I Apologize
It was not my intention to make such an implication. All I’m saying is, the Nats plan is to acquired veteran talent, much of which was never any good to begin with. It’s a losing strategy. It’s the Dave Littlefield strategy. It’s no good. And as long as they’re clearly using such a bad strategy, they can be counted on to make horrible decisions. That’s all.
by Androgen Jar Jimmy on Jul 9, 2009 4:07 PM EDT up reply actions
If They Were The Red Sox
And they had unlimited payroll, then I’d say sure, they should keep Dunn. But they’re not the Red Sox.
by Androgen Jar Jimmy on Jul 9, 2009 11:02 AM EDT up reply actions
The Nats have more than enough money...
…to support their current payroll. And Dunn’s contract is very efficient, in terms of wins per dollar. If they got rid of him, they’d be unlikely to find a better player on whom to spend the same money.
And of course, there’s the consideration of attendance. Dunn is a good drawing card for them, and the Nats are an absolutely ghastly team, much worse than any squad we’ve run out there during the losing streak.
"Absolutely ghastly"
Wow man. I know the Nats are terrible and all, but even that seems a bit harsh.
No, They Really Are That Bad
They’re 24-58. They’re on track to lose more than hundred games. They really do suck.
by Androgen Jar Jimmy on Jul 9, 2009 1:03 PM EDT up reply actions
Well, they've got a W% under .300.
The last NL team to turn that trick was the 1962 Mets (.250), who are often cited as the worst team of the modern era.
Well
They have absolutely ghastly pitching and fielding, that I can agree with, but they have a few decent position players. Zimmerman, Johnson and Dunn come to mind.
I know they suck, I just thought it was funny that you would use those terms while describing them. My first thought was “why don’t you tell us how you really feel”.
How I Really Feel
Is that a good AAA team would probably take a seven-game series from the Nats in five games.
by Androgen Jar Jimmy on Jul 9, 2009 2:11 PM EDT up reply actions
That and...
They sent him down, what, 24 AB into the year? They set themselves up for a stupid trade when they did that.
Seriously
If you’re only gonna give a guy 24 at-bats to prove himself, why put him on the team in the first place?
by Androgen Jar Jimmy on Jul 9, 2009 11:05 AM EDT up reply actions
This Is One Of The Things I Mean
When I say that the Nats do things just because they’re stupid.
by Androgen Jar Jimmy on Jul 9, 2009 11:06 AM EDT up reply actions
I think Milledge getting injured AND the Nats being dumb both led to the deal.
by Gorkys n' Beans on Jul 8, 2009 9:12 PM EDT up reply actions
heh
I like how you’re insinuating that the Nats made a decent deal there.
V.funny! ;)
by BlindSquirrel on Jul 8, 2009 9:03 PM EDT up reply actions
So what you're saying
Is that if the Pirates already had Milledge, you would like the idea of trading him in the middle of a rehab stint for Nyjer Morgan instead of waiting until he’s healthy?
You actually just made our point for us.
www.sixtyftsixin.com
by Sixty Feet, Six Inches on Jul 8, 2009 10:07 PM EDT up reply actions
You're Bad At Reading
That’s not what I said at all.
by Androgen Jar Jimmy on Jul 8, 2009 10:32 PM EDT up reply actions
I guess I just don’t believe that being injured or just coming off of an injury seriously hurts someone’s tradeability. We just acquired Lastings Milledge in the midst of his rehab.
Yes, and we absolutely fleeced the Nationals when doing so. You’re suggesting the Pirates should make a similar move with Doumit.
www.sixtyftsixin.com
by Sixty Feet, Six Inches on Jul 10, 2009 1:28 AM EDT up reply actions
Best time to trade doumit...
…would have to be this off-season wouldn’t it? Hope and pray he gets hot in the 2nd half, ends the season with a decent line. We then trade him in the winter meetings to a team that somehow has forgotten he’s injury prone and hope JJ and Roby get us through 2010 before Sanchez is ready.
(All of this contingent upon the fact that Doumit has a healthy, productive second half of 09)
havent we seen this before
ronny paulino, had a batting average of about .300 and we were sure he would be our catcher of the future, that really worked out, how cna you argue that when healthy doumit has shown that he can be an everyday catcher, and you are relying on hopefully JJ and roby get it done next year? so if they dont work out next year we dont have doumit whats next wait another 4 years until sanchez is ready? im tired of the same old pirates, when do prospects turn into players to keep? bay nate and morgan were all prospects we brought them up and they preformed well for us and we traded them. when do we keep them and say these are our players not prospects
CITY OF CHAMPYINZ
How you know a prospect is a keeper in thescheme of building a contender:
1. When they produce
2. When you can control the majority of said prospects for the same time frame
3. When you have consistent overall parts that mesh together to win (SP, bullpen, defense and offense)
If you have 1-3, you keep your players and are buyers at the deadline.
Were we contenders when we traded Bay, McClouth, Nady, Morgan and Burnett? The answer is a resounding NO. We were an average of 8 games under .500 when they were dealt.
When we have
more than one or two of them at time and they actually manage to get us to the playoffs or at least compete consistently.
Let Me Get This Straight
So you’re sick of Doumit, but you don’t like the idea of trading him.
by Androgen Jar Jimmy on Jul 9, 2009 11:31 AM EDT up reply actions
And furthermore
It will be way less than four years until Sanchez is ready. By all account his defense is good enough to play in the Majors right now; it’s just his bat that needs seasoning. He should be ready in 1-2 years. Getting an early start at West Virginia helps.
www.sixtyftsixin.com
by Sixty Feet, Six Inches on Jul 10, 2009 1:31 AM EDT up reply actions
I don't expect Doumit
to do much this season with a wrist injury. Hitting really requires the wrists and the hips more than anything else
and that Sanchez continues his tear of A- ball
Doumit could be a very attractive player in the AL. He is the perfect DH – he can hit for average with decent power. He also gives you flexibility at catcher since you could in essence have your DH and backup catcher in the same player.
What we need from Doumit (like previously posted) is the Nady affect coupled with Ari Gold to sell the 25 man roster flexibility to an AL team.
Doumit is NOT the perfect DH.
The perfect DH hits like an in-his-prime Jim Thome. Doumit’s bat would be fairly pedestrian there.
Using Doumit as a DH would waste a lot of his value, in that most DHs (such as Thome) can’t play catcher. And AL teams hate to use their backup catcher as DH, since an injury to the starting catcher would mean that in moving the DH-ing catcher behind the plate, they’d lose the use of the DH slot for the rest of the game.
That wouldn't lose the DH
because the DH works just like a fielding position. They would have to sub in someone for the injured catcher and just swap them with the current DH.
Doesn't work that way:
Per Rule 6.10(b): “Once a Designated Hitter assumes a defensive position this move shall terminate the Designated Hitter role for the remainder of the game.” -Link.
I am not going to argue that point
I dont have a ver;y good frame of reference for DH being an NL guy. I do think that Doumit would be average to potentially above average DH if he received the regular ABs while minimizing his fatigue behind the plate. You also minimize his exposure to injury – even though his last injury came while hitting.
While teams may not like having their back up catcher as DH, Doumit would give a team flexibility out of the DH spot for RF, 1B or catcher. There has to be some value in that right?
Minimal value.
Much less than he’d have as a starting catcher who can put up a .850 OPS.
Just for the record: AL average for a DH this year is a .790 OPS, and AL average for a catcher is a .722 OPS. For Doumit to be more valuable as a catcher, you’d have to get a significant increase in his offensive productivity from the position switch, and while that’s possible, I don’t think it’s a very good bet.
Teams don’t usually trade for someone with the intent of making them a DH. The DH slot is where they stash expensive commitments at other positions who can no longer play those positions, i.e. expensive veterans in the last season or two of multi-year deals.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Baseball Nation Recent Stories
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Photo: Padres fan regrets letting mother capture moment with Trevor Hoffman
- Marlins agree to unretire No. 5 for Logan Morrison, who will honor his father’s favorite player
- Weatherman Derek Holland does Dallas TV
- Ask Alex: Will Julio Teheran or Matt Moore win rookie of the year?
- Ku Klux Klan, umpires and bowling: Why the minor leagues tossed out Jim Evans academy
Certain photos copyright © 2012 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.
