Steve Pearce Working Out At Third Base
by Charlie Wilmoth on Feb 23, 2011 4:44 PM EST
Email
Print
The Pirates have Steve Pearce working out at third in Spring Training in an effort to give the Pirates more options from the bench.
Assuming Ryan Doumit remains with the organization and that the Pirates carry a third catcher, the club is going to have to find a middle infield backup and someone who can fill in at the corner infield spots. If Pearce can be serviceable at both infield corners, he could make a push to beat out Garrett Atkins, Josh Fields and Andy Marte for that backup role.
A couple of things here:
1) I don't see any need to have a third catcher. The Bucs used Doumit as their backup last August after they acquired Chris Snyder last year. They had Erik Kratz and Jason Jaramillo at catcher before the trade, and when they acquired Snyder, they sent Jaramillo to the minors. Then when they activated Doumit a few days later, they sent Kratz down as well. It seems like a waste of a roster spot to carry Snyder, Doumit and Jaramillo this year. There might be some concern about having Doumit pinch-hit and then not have him available if something happens to Snyder, but that concern isn't important enough to spend one of five bench spots on a third catcher. It will be interesting to see whether Doumit plays catcher at all if they do carry one, however.
2) I likewise don't see a need to worry much about a corner infield backup. Pedro Alvarez will play third most days, and when he doesn't, the Pirates can just use someone who might make the team for other reasons, like Neil Walker, Josh Rodriguez or Corey Wimberly, all of whom have at least some background playing third base. And Garrett Jones can handle first on days when Lyle Overbay isn't playing. If it's flexibility the Pirates want, they should probably take someone like Rodriguez before any of the corner infielders, like Garrett Atkins, Andy Marte or Josh Fields. If what they want is hitting, then I'd go with Pearce, John Bowker or maybe Fields. But I don't like anyone should get a roster spot primarily because of his ability to play first and third.
In any case, due to the fact that he has an option, Pearce is in a tough spot, just like he always seems to be. Pearce during Spring Training three years ago:
"I look out there and see LaRoche and Nady. I know how it is," Pearce said. "But I'm not going to take what they say about this to heart. I'm not. I'm still going to compete and try to make the team."
Pearce in Spring Training now:
"I'm not going to take it as a slap in the face," Pearce said of the prospect of starting in Triple-A for the fourth straight year. "I'm going to go down there and get my everyday at-bats so that when they do need me again, I'm going to come up and be ready just like I was last year."
Nothing ever changes for him.
-P- Charlie Morton will start in the Pirates' first Spring Training game against the Rays on Saturday. Brad Lincoln will also pitch two innings.
122 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Agreed on several points....
1) No reason to carry a 3rd catcher. Doumit can handle the spot-start at C, as long as it is a spot-start, and not some platoon.
2) Pearce is in a tough spot, no doubt, partially created by his availability of an option and partially based on his lack of ‘proving it’ at the Major leagues. He would be preferable to Atkins, Fields, or Marte.
3) My 5 Bench spots: Diaz/Jones, Doumit, Rule 5, Pearce, Ciraco. Only problem is that I don’t see both Ciraco and Rule 5 making the team, but I think you could use Ciraco as your MIF check on Cedeno, Rule 5 is the Utility role, and Pearce as the RHB off the bench, as well as platooning with Overbaby if he continues (which he most likel will) with the high platoon splits. Doumit handles the 4 OF role, as well as the back-up catcher. What I am missing?
by CabreraKilledMyChildhood on Feb 23, 2011 4:52 PM EST reply actions
Bowker - that is who I forgot
If it is Bowker, allowing Pearce to show he’s back at AAA, that wouldn’t be bad either.
I don’t want Atkins, Marte, or Fields. Or Wimberly.
by CabreraKilledMyChildhood on Feb 23, 2011 4:59 PM EST up reply actions
That seems a bit strong
A career OPS of 736 in pretty neutral parks would seem to imply something other than “can’t hit at all.” “No power,” I’d buy. “I hope he’s not a starter,” I’d buy.
Viva Clemente!
A career OPS of 736 in pretty neutral parks
He hasn’t played in “pretty neutral parks”, though. Two of his six seasons were in Tulsa, which is a pretty favorable hitting environment, and another was in Casper, which is as well.
And of course, he’s also generally been older than his competition while coming up through the minors.
as i mentioned elsewhere
that skillset was enough to keep Nyjer Morgan as a starter for a couple of years. Although Morgan’s being older was due to different reasons. Still, I could see Wimberley turning in an OK couple of seasons, if he can cut it at CF/SS defensively.
by BurgherKing on Feb 24, 2011 11:41 AM EST up reply actions
he could be a very good BACKUP, yes?
plays many positions, switch hitter, great wheels…
by white angus on Feb 24, 2011 12:06 PM EST up reply actions
he could even be an acceptable starter
for a while, on a team with a hole in SS, e.g. I could see the Brewers wanting him next year.
as i mentioned elsewhere that skillset was enough to keep Nyjer Morgan as a starter for a couple of years.
Morgan was a better hitter than Wimberly, and a hugely better defender as well. It’s a lot easier to be a starter with an anemic bat when you’re putting 20+ glove runs on the board.
How good is his glove? I dont know.
Whose? Wimberly’s?
From what I can tell, he’s more of a “Jack of all trades, master of none” type.
but isnt that fine for a backup???
look at josh harrison; if he continues to hit, he could be a nice utility player despite being a “master of none”…
those are the kinds of players who should be looked at as being good role guys. not starters.
by white angus on Feb 24, 2011 10:27 PM EST up reply actions
Correct on the age, wrong on the parks
Now I can’t find park data for Casper, but unless it looks like a little league field, Wimberly’s performance there doesn’t exactly support your hypothesis that “he can’t hit at all.” His batting average was 381 and his OPS was 854.
Of more relevance, his batting average in AA has been 285 and his OBP has been 352. In AAA last year they were 284 and 373. Since Tulsa has a park factor for hits of 1.00, Midland is at 1.02, Sacramento is at 0.95 I’m not inclined to view this as confirming he can’t hit. Tulsa is a good place to hit a home run, and Wimberly took full advantage. He muscled up to hit 4 in 848 PA.
Viva Clemente!
Now I can’t find park data for Casper
There’s some from 2008 in this article. It is, as I said, a very good hitting environment, pretty much across the board. That was actually one of Colorado’s player development strategies at the time: to seek out good hitting environments for their minor league affiliates, to try and toughen up their prospects and get them used to playing at altitude.
His batting average was 381 and his OPS was 854.
Yes, and he was a highly-drafted 21-year-old playing in rookie ball. And it happened six years ago. It has almost no effect on his forward projection at this point.
Since Tulsa has a park factor for hits of 1.00
1.01 for hits, according to the 2006-2008 average Szym posted here. It’s also 1.05 for doubles, 1.03 for walks, and 1.02 for runs scored. Wimberly’s line was pumped up by his home environment, even though he wasn’t a big masher.
In AAA last year they were 284 and 373.
Which is, in and of itself, a concern. High-walk low-power hitters from AAA tend to become low-walk low-power hitters when promoted to the ML level, since ML pitchers aren’t afraid to just throw strikes right down the pipe (insofar as the hitter lacks the physical ability to make the pitcher pay with an XBH). If he were a spectacular contact hitter (like Howie Kendrick or Jeff Keppinger) propping up his OBP with BA, he might hang onto some of it, but as things are it probably won’t carry forward. And at his size, I don’t see him having a lot of untapped power potential.
What I am missing?
Not much that I can see. You probably lose Bowker on waivers, since he’s out of options, but if you’re OK with that then it’s a decent bench setup. If I were going to change anything, it’d be to swap out Ciriaco for one of the 3Bs (or Bowker if Pearce ends up being able to handle 3B).
Ciriaco
I’ll be real disappointed if he makes the team.
He’s terrible offensively.
Agree
I’d rather see Rodriguez struggle a bit than Ciriaco struggle just as much, with no chance of improving.
I have slightly different feelings if Ciriaco would be lost (does he have options?), but not much. If Cedeno is so bad that Ciriaco is better, we’re truly fucked. And I think it’s even money that Rodriguez is as good as Ciriaco anyway.
Rodriguez
I’m not sure he can play ss on a regular basis.
But I think he may be an option at 2b.
I just think Ciriaco is terrible. I don’t see him hitting much about .200 in the bigs.
Rodriguez
I m really interested to know if his bat is legit though. If it is, I’d keep him.
We may need a real 2B, and as far as I can tell, people seem to think he can cut it at 2B.
If he can fake SS for a bit with a .770+ OPS, that’s all I can ask for for 2011.
I have slightly different feelings if Ciriaco would be lost (does he have options?)
I believe that Ciriaco has one remaining option, since he wasn’t rostered until the ‘08/’09 offseason.
I'd go for upside ...
and since I don’t think Ciriaco has any, I wouldn’t have him on the team.
However, I suspect you are right. He probably is the best utility infielder option defensively.
But since I see no long-term value—and the team is going to be bad—I’d take my chances with Rodriguez.
why does every player on the team have to have upside???
i understand this in theory, but it doesnt make practical sense… why would you want a someone who has upside to be barely playing? how does this help him as a player?
im sorry, but i just dont get this…
tony sanchez has lots of upside, why doesnt he just move on up to MLB and back up synder???
by white angus on Feb 23, 2011 10:00 PM EST up reply actions
For me ...
not everyone has to have upside on the MLB roster. Of course, there are role playrs. My argument: Rodriguez has much more value than Ciriaco.
Ciriaco looks useless in his minor league numbers. His last three years of OPS in the minors: .660, .670, .686.
Clearly, I don’t see that translating well to the majors. Ciriaco has the look of a really bad utility guy. Think Luis Rivas.
On the other hand, Rodriguez has OPS numbers of .858, .881, .760.
Those numbers suggest he could hit at the MLB level. The question is his defense at 2b and ss.
Why would you keep Ciriaco when there are tons of light hitting utility guys out there? That’s not a hard to get asset.
Rodriguez, on the other hand, projects much better. He would not be as easy to replace.
Sorry Angus, but you misstated my point: It was Ciriaco is terrible. You don’t lose a potentially useful player solely because Ciriaco may be slightly better with the glove now.
The Pirates have to think more strategically. They are going to lose a 90 games with either guy as the utility infielder.
But who will help the team more long term? I suspect Rodriguez.
Clearly, I don’t see that translating well to the majors. Ciriaco has the look of a really bad utility guy. Think Luis Rivas.
That’s a bit unfair. At least Ciriaco can field.
Well, that was a bat comparison
Not one of the glove.
So I think a Rivas comparison is reasonable.
In fact, Rivas has an MLB OPS of .681.
That’s probably far better than Ciriaco can produce.
But I agree that Ciriaco is a better fielder than Rivas was.
but ciriaco would be a backup
good defense, good speed… i dont see that as a problem as long as hes a backup
by white angus on Feb 24, 2011 10:58 AM EST up reply actions
So he's a bad back-up for one year ...
before the Pirates find another utility guy.
That doesn’t seem to be of much use to the team.
On the other hand, Rodriguez could have real value to the team long term.
He has some of the same traits but can actually hit.
It’s going to be a choice of either/or.
And I’d choose Rodriguez.
If Sanchez were out of options,
he WOULD make the roster this year.
But me being a jacka$$ aside, I’m with you on this.
why does every player on the team have to have upside???
Well, ideally, we’re building toward something in a future season. By playing a guy with upside, you sometimes end up with a player who’s more valuable at the end of the season that he was at the start of it. Potentially even a building block for the future.
Whereas a guy without upside is only ever going to be what he is right now, or less than that once he starts to age.
but why would you put an UPSIDE guy on the BENCH???
it doesnt make any sense to me… you should play him on a daily basis, wether it be in Pitt or Indy.
by white angus on Feb 24, 2011 10:59 AM EST up reply actions
but why would you put an UPSIDE guy on the BENCH???
Ideally, you have nothing but upside guys. Upside guys in the lineup, upside guys on the bench, upside guys across the entire farm system…
In something that more closely approximates real life: If you have a bench guy with upside, who’s already shown a mastery of AAA, you call him up and give him more than an average benchie’s playing time, maybe three starts a week across his best two positions. Enough time to get acclimated to MLB competition and stay sharp, but not enough that you disrupt your lineup.
What do you want?
Really bad veterans?
Seriously. I don’t see a problem with giving an upside guy a few starts a week to keep him fresh, to evaluate what you have.
Rodriguez is the perfect example. He could prove that he deserves a shot to compete at 2b next year based on 150 at bats.
Ciriaco will only prove what we already know.
He can’t hit AAA pitching so he’s really going to suck at the MLB level.
and if they decide to carry Rodriguez
I m pretty sure they could find him close to 300 ABs, at least. Make him fill in for Pedro, Walker, Cedeno, Tabata, on their days off.
by BurgherKing on Feb 24, 2011 11:43 AM EST up reply actions
just how many days off do your star players get?
not many, mon frere’
i want our backups to play multiple positions and offer either a nice power bat or speed… pearce, as long as he plays more than 1B and wimberly could be fine bench guys. rodriguez, not sure about but people like him. doumit can catch and almost play elsewhere, plus hes a switch hitter.
for example, if d’Arnaud is ready for MLB, i want him starting, not backing up Walker and Cedeno and starting once a week. he should play every day.
by white angus on Feb 24, 2011 12:11 PM EST up reply actions
just how many days off do your star players get?
1 every 10 games or so? Maybe 15? If we go with 15, then in a 162 game season, each of Tabata/Cedeno/Walker/Cutch/ALvarez get ~11 days off?
55 games. Let’s say sometimes both get days off, so 40 games Rodriguez can start. That’s about 160 AB. Let’s say they make an effort to start him outside of replacement starts. So, another 10, or about 200 AB. And maybe another 100-150 as pinch hitting/replacement?
Not that hard to squeeze out 300 AB for a guy you genuinely want to evaluate. Naturally, this is my argument for Rodriguez only.
of course, you’re right about D’Arnaud for the most part. If the team is closer to contention, it may be worth having him on the bench if he is genuinely the best player available.
just how many days off do your star players get?
20 each a year, maybe? So if the majority of those starts go to Rodriguez, he’s starting 50 games a year.
for example, if d’Arnaud is ready for MLB, i want him starting, not backing up Walker and Cedeno and starting once a week.
If d’Arnaud is ready for MLB, he’s a full-timer and Cedeno’s getting one start a week off the bench.
most "star" players get at least 150 games in. especially if they are in contention
barring nagging injuries of course
by white angus on Feb 24, 2011 10:29 PM EST up reply actions
I believe I saw somewhere that Ciriaco has 2 options
by 2010 will be the year on Feb 23, 2011 8:19 PM EST up reply actions
He is...
…but he’s probably also the best defensive infielder in camp. It’s him or Mercer.
So it’s kind of a question of skill priorities: What do you want to emphasize when building your bench?
Carrying a third catcher in addition to Snyder and Doumit is one of the dumbest ideas I’ve heard in a long time. Particularly insofar as we have a fairly decent emergency catcher on hand in Walker, if the unthinkable were to happen.
I hope Pearce can cut it at third. It’ll not only give him a better shot at our roster, it’ll also give him a better chance at not getting screwed out of future jobs in his next organization if the front office is bound and determined to bury him at AAA again this year.
Bound and determined to keep Pearce down?
Any evidence of that? Any legitimate rationale to think that?
I cannot fathom they would ‘bury’ him at Triple A unless they thought they had better options and were able to keep another player because of being out of options.
I don’t the Pirates are in the position to be ‘burying’ people for some theoretical reason. They need all the help they can get.
by CabreraKilledMyChildhood on Feb 23, 2011 5:02 PM EST up reply actions
Any evidence of that?
I would suggest that the decision to not carry him on the roster at the start of ‘08, the decision to acquire Clement and then start Clement over him last year, and the decision to pursue a fourth option year for him rather than someone like Hart or Ascanio this offseason (not to mention the Overbay signing) indicate that the front office has placed a fairly low priority on assessing Pearce’s skills at the ML level. I don’t think that it’s personal, or anything like that. He’s just caught in a bad spot, in that they think he’s too valuable to cut loose outright, but not valuable enough to actually use.
I cannot fathom they would ‘bury’ him at Triple A unless they thought they had better options…
I’m sure they have thought that they had better options. Teams will almost never act against what they perceive to be their best interest. I just don’t necessarily agree that their assessment is/was correct.
Correct me if I'm wrong...
But didn’t both Ascanio and Hart have their last option used in 2009? That would mean they were not eligible to have 4th options granted in 2011 (or 2010).
Ascanio played most of 2009 before getting hurt, and Hart played all of 2009 before getting hurt. So, there would be no reason to grant a 4th option for either. The 4th option, as I understand it, is granted in a case like Pearce where he was hurt near the beginning of the year.
I also really don’t see why Pearce should have been on the roster in 2008. Obviously, acquiring Clement meant the Pirates were not sold on Pearce being able to hold down the starting 1B position. If CLement would have worked out, that would, in fact, have been a better scenario, since he’s left handed and more of a power threat than Pearce.
For me, last year was the first year Pearce showed me in AAA that he had a good chance of making an impact in MLB. But nothing he has done has yet shown that he would be very strong against RHPs.
by MarkInDallas on Feb 23, 2011 10:25 PM EST up reply actions
I also really don’t see why Pearce should have been on the roster in 2008.
He was Minor League Player of the Year in 2007, had a solid cup of coffee after the roster expansion, and then looked good in spring training. Often, in a situation like that, the team will create a spot for the prospect even if one isn’t naturally available. Look at the Giants with Brandon Belt this year, for example.
no offense to Pearce, but Belt is a real prospect now... top 30 i believe...
but i agree with you pretty much on this
by white angus on Feb 24, 2011 11:00 AM EST up reply actions
Pearce was a “real prospect” back then, too. BA had him on their top 100 coming into the 2008 season, albeit not quite as high on the list as Belt is this year.
i always sound like im blasting Pearce, so i'll have to change how i speak about him
i dont dislike him as a player. he had 2 really good seasons in the minor leagues, and he deserved(s) a shot at the bigs. learning 3B is the best thing for HIS career, not just as a Pirate but as a major leaguer. an undersized 1Bman running out of opportunities isnt very tempting to many teams out there, especially with so many 1Bmen out there. look at kila ka’aihue; same boat as pearce, IMO.
by white angus on Feb 24, 2011 12:14 PM EST up reply actions
What would have been more likely, however...
Since Pearce only had 34 games in AAA in 2007, normal would be for him to start in AAA in 2008, prove that he was dominating that level, and then be ready for a mid season call up.
Problem was, Pearce didn’t dominate AAA in 2008; he regressed. And then, he didn’t do too well when he was brought up.
by MarkInDallas on Feb 24, 2011 5:01 PM EST up reply actions
I Agree-No 3rd Catcher
I have thought about thus a bit and I agree we don’t need a 3rd catcher. Walker can fill in in an emergency.
As for Pearce, he has yet to show he can hit in the MLB and he has an option. By trying out 3rd maybe he can provide some versitility. Otherwise it might be back to AAA until needed.
I like the Pirates being creative to try to use guys. Look what happened when they tried Walker at 2B, that seems to have worked out all around.
Agreed
You have Snyder starting most games.
If Doumit is playing RF, for example, he could move there if Snyder gets hurt.
Then you have Walker as the emergency guy for a few innings.
You can always call up someone tomorrow. But you don’t waste a roster spot on a 3rd catcher, especially with the 12-man staffs they love.
what?
“You dont wanna get screwed by DY throwing from 3B? Play it yourself!”
by BurgherKing on Feb 23, 2011 5:05 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
heyyyyyyy, is the FO listening to Angus??? is li'l stevie???
see, Pearce SHOULD learn 3B… if he becomes passable, he definately makes the team, and definately ahead of atkins, marte and fields.
go get em, Steve!!!
by white angus on Feb 23, 2011 5:28 PM EST reply actions 6 recs
Let me get this out of the way now...
+1 and rec for suggesting this weeks ago. Especially when others like me thought it wasn’t a good idea!!!
"Where did you get the idea to have Steve Pearce play at 3B?"
“I read it in the comments section on a Pirates blog.”
by IAPiratesFan on Feb 23, 2011 6:02 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
pretty sure Pearce has played 3B before and/or someone had suggested this long ago but I will give you a thumbs up for not being the person on here who said they can’t acknowledge that Doumit has no shot of being able to play SS.
Correct
Pearce played 3rd in South Carolina
The glare of the spotlight is harsh, and the pressure that success breeds immense. We revere our heroes, but expect much. And criticism can come as easily as praise.
damnit, i wish i knew that, it would have made my argument a whole lot easier
by white angus on Feb 24, 2011 11:03 AM EST up reply actions
I still would have argued with you...
that’s what I do. At least I can admit I lost this one. I didn’t thik they would try him at 3B. Hopefully he can do a decent job there.
which we should all be pulling for...
the main reason why ive never been sold on pearce is because hes always low on the totem pole for the position he plays. and RF hes not even in the running. but learning to play corners in both in the infield and the outfield makes him very valuable to the pirates.
i come across as not liking pearce, and i apologize about that.
by white angus on Feb 24, 2011 10:32 PM EST up reply actions
I'd have to agree about Pearce...
While I agree that it wouldn’t kill us to carry Pearce over other options like Garrett Atkins or even Ryan Doumit (both of whom I feel have had more than enough chances to prove their worth), I don’t buy the whole “they’re burying him” ethos. While he has had somewhat promising stints at the major league level, he’s never produced at levels that absolutely merit him a roster spot. What his performances do merit him are what should amount to a tiebreaker if it comes down to him or someone else for one of the backup roles. Better to use him in that role with the higher chance that he may end up doing something rather than settling for a given under-performance that is almost guaranteed with the likes of Atkins.
But burying him? If it’s so obvious I doubt this team would hold any vendettas against players that THEY control that can help them win – which is something they struggle at, obviously.
And I'm not saying it's Doumit vs Pearce at this point
Rather, just mentioned Doumit to prove the point that I too am pretty high on Pearce. I just don’t follow the conspiracy theory.
I've been in favor of no 3rd C all along
As some of you may recall, I’m a big fan of finding an emergency C on the roster to allow the backup to actually see more use than Sunday afternoons and the occasional 13th innings. Given that Doumit has plenty to offer with the bat, it wouldn’t make sense to strand him on the bench OR to relegate him to standard backup duty.
But the biggest question (and one hinted at by Charlie) is: if JJ were on the team, what time at catcher would Doumit get? I mean, I could see Snyder and Doumit as a loose platoon/two-headed C situation, but once you give a start per week to JJ (and I think it would be crazy not to – the guy needs game action to stay competent), you really start to reduce opportunities. Can Doumit be effective with just 1-2 C starts per week?
All of which, I suppose, returns us to moving Doumit. But I think it would be the worst possible reason to do so. The team is clearly better with Snyder and Doumit as the only Cs than with Snyder and JJ. More expensive, of course, but we all doubt whether Doumit will return us anything in a trade unless we take on salary. I’m always open to moving him for real value (even if that means paying his salary), but I’ll be damned if Doumit is traded for some middling prospect and we pay his salary, all so that the catcher position isn’t confusing,
To be clear
In this instance, Walker is the obvious emergency C (as Vlad noted). But I think every ML team should find somebody on the 25 man who can don the mask if the worst comes to pass. It’s a lot worse to waste a player on the bench every game than to risk an extremely rare 2-3 innings with your backup 1B behind the plate.
Agreed
Having no 3rd catcher might cost you that one game, but over the course of the season having Jaramillo on your bench will probably cost you more wins over keeping an actual productive bench player.
3rd C
I doubt there’s many people that want one. I think there’s some misinterpretation of that- mostly people are referring to a JJ on the roster because they want to see Doumit gone. (I am not one of those, fwiw)
the critique of pearce serving as a backup corner infielder seems a little strange to me… I mean, the other day there was dread at the prospect of garrett atkins getting time backing up third, especially since it might come at the expense of steve pearce’s roster spot… letting pearce try and compete for the same role seems like a positive development, at least with regards to atkins’ prospects of making the team…
how important will it be to have a guy who can spell pedro at third? presuming he doesn’t get hurt, I dunno… I can imagine hurdle wanting to pinch run for him in the later innings (what was the comment he made about using the team’s speed and perhaps having a baserunning specialist on the bench?)
one way or the other, backup third baseman seems to be an issue… maybe they’re thinking of moving pedro to first as soon as they can dump overbay… ha!
by Captain Easychord on Feb 23, 2011 9:12 PM EST reply actions
walker can back up at 3B
and rodriguez/ciriaco/winberly can play 2B. Not a big deal.
I’d only want Steve Pearce on the major league roster (whether he backs up 3B or not) if he’s going to actually get playing time at 1B platooning with Overbay. If he’s playing once every 10 games, might as well let him play every day in AAA.
well not that I was asking who would back up third (and I wasn’t), but I hardly think it’s an ideal situation to have your starting second baseman – a guy who’s trying to learn a new position, to boot – as your primary backup elsewhere on the diamond… but ultimately what we think about that doesn’t matter… the pirates apparently want other options at third (atkins, pearce) and they’re the ones making the roster choices… it appears to be an issue to them, so I don’t think we should be surprised if that preference ends up reflected in the roster choices…
by Captain Easychord on Feb 23, 2011 11:43 PM EST up reply actions
like people have said
Alvarez is going to play pretty much every day. He’ll only need a few rest days, and that can easily be handled by Walker or Rodriguez/Ciriaco/Wimberly. No need to keep a guy who specifically can play 3B when we’ve already got at least 2 guys who can play there.
If Alvarez goes down for any significant time, they can bring up Atkins/Fields/Marte from AAA or something.
by titanlord91 on Feb 24, 2011 12:51 AM EST up reply actions
Hmm
Am I the only one who is pullin for Andy Marte?
twitter.com/iandavidjackson
by omar moreno on Feb 23, 2011 10:18 PM EST via mobile reply actions
I like him
but only because he has the greatest at bat music of all time.
Why would you do that
I didn’t have the sound on and I only saw a few seconds, but I think I still lost a couple IQ points from watching that.
I'm cheering for Fields or Marte
I really don’t want Atkins on the roster.
I hope they can keep Bowker or Pearce.
I'm not cheering for any of them.
I’m only hoping that at least one of them takes a step forward and plays well enough to give the Bucs a decent bench option. I would say that at least one of Atkins/Fields/Bowker will find out the grass is greener on the other side of the globe this year.
if pearce becomes adequate at 3B, he will be on the roster...
not atkins, not marte, not fields…
so sayeth thy angusth
"If Pearce becomes adequate at 3B, he will be on the roster...."
No, the organization will send him to Indy to get more game experience. He’ll go through some games at the postion, just like he has in the OF, and then they’ll decide that he’s pretty lousy there, as with the OF, and move him back to 1B/DH. He’ll show up in Pittsburgh for a while once somebody else gets hurt, or Vlad gets the Pirates to release Lyle Overbay, and he’ll get a handful or so more games on his Pirates’ resume before heading elsewhere in 2012.
Oh, for the good ol' days of fewer pitchers and more position players
and guys like Duffy Dyer were on the roster.
Somebody else feel free to throw out another name or two.
Matt Alexander: Have legs, will travel.
by Vlad on Feb 24, 2011 11:19 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
My bench guess:
Diaz/Jones, Doumit, Rodriguez, Atkins and Fields…to start the year, but we’ll see a bunch of changes over the course of the long campaign.
Let’s get the spring season out of the way and get to April and the real games!
youre one position player short, right?
should be six??? diaz, doumit, rodriguez, wimberly, pearce, jaramillo?
by white angus on Feb 24, 2011 11:06 AM EST up reply actions
ouch Atkins and Fields!
I could get on board with Fields, and maybe I could fool myself into believing Atkins will contribute some, but both would kill me! Assuming no injuries to Bowker.
by BurgherKing on Feb 24, 2011 11:45 AM EST up reply actions
I shudder to think...
Free your ass and your mind will follow.
by cocktailsfor2 on Feb 24, 2011 11:47 AM EST up reply actions
Pearce at 2B?
I know Walker is somewhat planted there (things always change), but considering that Pearce plays the right side of the infield, is 5’11", and about 195lbs, doesn’t he have a better stature for 2B? I would probably pull a ‘Walker’ and send him back to AAA at the start of the season and play him exclusively between 3B and 2B. He should at least be able to adapt to 2B and provide some more options for the Pirates. Actually, Pearce should have taken the onus in the off-season to learn a few more positions before coming to Spring Training 3 years ago. Hindsight is twenty-twenty. I would suggest that to any player who may seem “roadblocked.”
by formerdraftpick on Feb 24, 2011 11:00 AM EST reply actions
There's no way ...
Pearce is athletic enough to play 2b, unless you mean in a Delmon Young way.
I don’t believe he can play 3b.
He may have the build for it. But there is also athletic ability.
He needs to focus on 1b and OF, I think.
Hey -
are you saying DY can’t play secon…
Yeah, never mind.
Free your ass and your mind will follow.
by cocktailsfor2 on Feb 24, 2011 11:47 AM EST up reply actions
if pearce focuses on 1B and OF...
he will be a journeyman the rest of his career.
by white angus on Feb 24, 2011 12:16 PM EST up reply actions
3 years ago
Pearce was hardly roadblocked. he was a rising prospect.
I doubt he can cut it at 2B.
by BurgherKing on Feb 24, 2011 11:47 AM EST up reply actions
The sad part is...
Bernie, I’m on the fence with you on Pearce playing 3B. I watched him with the Indy Indians at 3B and his comfort zone was so off. Then again, he never played the position before until he was forced into a game. However, 2B…Walker did it, Jeff Kent did it, Brandon Inge did it….why not Pearce? He may have hands of steel, but might be able to have 20 dingers in a season. White Angus, you are definitely right, he will be a journeyman, but the more versatility he has, the more he’ll be able to earn a paycheck in the bigs.
As for Delmon….Delmon Young used to play second early in his career in the minors. It shouldn’t have been such a huge transition for him. The more he works on it, the better he’ll become.
I also mentioned roadblocked because it was written in the article. The last two years, Pearce has plenty of chances. However, look at guys like Kyle Banks of the Padres and Daniel Murphy on the Mets. They were roadblocked. If you don’t adapt, you lose out.
by formerdraftpick on Feb 25, 2011 9:32 AM EST up reply actions
First base to second base would be a pretty crazy career path. I can’t think of even one guy who did that.
look at guys like Kyle Banks of the Padres
I think it’s a bit early to consign Banks to the never-will-be pile. He could very well end up as their starting 1B with a good spring. He just needs to beat out Brad Hawpe and Jorge Cantu, and neither of those guys is exactly an immovable object.
Daniel Murphy is a good example
He is making the transition.
I don’t see Pearce as any more than a DY type anywhere other than 1b.
DY is a good example, though. He just didn’t have the skills and athletic ability—regardless of his history at the position—to play it.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Bucs Dugout
Related FanShots on Bucs Dugout
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Baseball Nation Recent Stories
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- The Juice: Nelson Cruz matches career high eight RBIs, Pujols stays hot in Seattle
- Benches clear at Fenway as Red Sox-Rays rivalry heats up
- Keeping good company: Albert Pujols becomes fourth-youngest player to hit 450 home runs
- Giancarlo Stanton misses cutoff man, and Logan Morrison is thankful he did (Video)
- Snoop Dogg delivers memorable first pitch at U.S. Cellular Field
