Corey Wimberly Struggling To Win Bench Job
by Charlie Wilmoth on Mar 7, 2011 3:53 AM EST
Email
PrintJenifer Langosch has some notes on Corey Wimberly, who, if you happened to see the game yesterday, didn't play particularly well as a shortstop.
Well, Wimberly finally got his chances on Sunday. And the outcome, as those of you who watched at home can attest to, wasn't all that pretty.
On the first ball hit to him at short this spring, Wimberly sailed a throw over Josh Fields' head at first base. The error eventually led to two unearned runs. Wimberly had another chance in the fifth and made a low throw over to first. The ball took a short hop just in front of Fields, who had to make a terrific pick to record the out.
The Pirates are intrigued by Wimberly's speed, but it has been noted multiple times that the club has to carry a middle infielder who can play short well. That was the Pirates' biggest concern with Wimberly coming in, and it's a concern that has not been alleviated to this point.
I'm not sure Wimberly's struggles as shortstop should, in themselves, disqualify him from a bench job. I think the Bucs will carry either Josh Rodriguez or Pedro Ciriaco as a utility guy, and that in addition to the regular utilityman, there could still be a spot for Wimberly, who can play several infield positions and center field. (This assumes the Pirates don't do something silly like carry a third catcher.) If Wimberly is to be useful as a shortstop, it will mostly only be for a few innings here and there, in spots where the regular backup has been used already and the Bucs need another guy to make a double switch, or something like that. He doesn't need to be great, or even particularly good, at the position in order for him to make life a little easier for his manager.
Still, I'm skeptical about whether he can contribute. In order to be a good major league bench player, as opposed to a merely convenient one, you've got to hit at least a little. ZiPS projects that Wimberly will hit .245/.310/.295 this year. That's just ... no. For perspective, Rodriguez is at .249/.324/.374, and Ciriaco is at .265/.285/.356. Rodriguez projects to be a lot better, and even Ciriaco (who I'd prefer not make the team either) is probably slightly better, and he can actually play shortstop. Or, to put Wimberly's projection in perspective in a different way, the on-base and slugging percentages were almost exactly what Bobby Crosby hit for the Pirates last year.
Why, you might ask, does Wimberly's projection look so bad when he posted good OBPs in the minors? Vlad in the comments a couple weeks ago:
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.
This is pretty much how I see it as well. You'll occasionally have guys like Nyjer Morgan and Willy Taveras who have Wimberly's basic hitting profile and manage to succeed for a couple years, but those guys are often exceptional defenders, and Wimberly doesn't appear to be, at least not at this early point in Spring Training. I went through Wimberly's lists of comparables at ZiPS and PECOTA (the PECOTA one hasn't been updated for this year), and after ZiPS' top comp (Taveras), both lists look pretty dire. Both compare him to Keith Thrower, an '80s player who never got out of the minors. ZiPS compares him to Jim Buccheri, who played 13 years in the minors and never made it to the show. PECOTA's top comp is Darrell Brown, who got 591 major-league at bats and had a .629 career OPS. The rest of the top five includes Thrower, Tony Womack, and career minor leaguers Larry Reynolds and Sam Haro. (Big props to those of you who knew that Haro was a Pirates minor leaguer - I didn't. That was before my time.)
I'm probably heavily over-thinking this. If Wimberly is the perfect fit for the team otherwise, and he's only competing for the sort of bench role that will get him 150 at bats in a season, then you go ahead and give him the job; the comparables don't matter too much. But my point is that there doesn't appear to be any real upside here. The guy is tiny and his bat does not look like it will play well at all. So if he can't play terrific defense, the Pirates should probably just shrug their shoulders and send him to Indianapolis, where he can probably do pretty well.
192 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
It's sad
I thought his twitter handle would be enough to make the team. Wimboslice3
by ATribeCalledGreg on Mar 7, 2011 8:17 AM EST reply actions
If our utility player needs to play SS well….we need a new utility player. I’m not conviced Wimberly OR J. Rodriguez can play SS, at least not for a prolonged period of time.
Ciriaco needs to be playing every day, so he’ll probably end up in AAA to do so. Perhaps the Pirates can get by with J. Rodriguez (I’d like to see the kid stick on the ML roster, so we can keep him). We could then get away with Ciriaco in AAA…and if Cedeno were to get injured for a prolonged period of time, make a decision then.
Because I think that, as of today, he’s #2 line to play SS for us.
Unless we make an unforseen roster move, a Cedeno injury is going to thrust him into Pittsburgh. Neither Wimberly or Rodriguez will be able to hold that position down for a prolonged period of time.
By getting Ciriaco constant reps at SS (or even some at SS, if working him and D’Arnaud in at 2B would add value to them) in AAA, along with at bats, he will stay as sharp as can be expected. Sitting on the bench in Pittsburgh, getting few reps and at bats, will not benefit him, or our ML team if he has to step in and play. He has some holes in his game, some of which may never get fixed (like plate discipline), but filling a bench role on the ML club will not make him any better — it may hinder any development.
I’m just a proponent of getting him constant playing time, versus letting him rot on the bench. I’m not totally comfortable with him at other positions (as he doesn’t have much exposure to them), and would like to see the Rodriguez kid stick on the ML roster this season.
by insane_sanity on Mar 7, 2011 10:54 AM EST up reply actions
My guess is
Ciriaco is almost a shoe-in for the backup SS role on the club. I seriously doubt that they are going to be thinking he’s a player they want to get everyday reps at Indy. If there’s a minor injury to Cedeno, which happens all the time, Ciriaco is the guy I want to come in.
by MarkInDallas on Mar 7, 2011 11:26 AM EST up reply actions
it doesnt take very long to get to Pitt from Indy
playing everyday in AAA is better for a young player than playing twice a week in the bigs… not monetarially, of course
Because
he can’t hit?
Free your ass and your mind will follow.
by cocktailsfor2 on Mar 7, 2011 12:06 PM EST up reply actions
Cedeno or Ciriaco can`t hit?
is there a big difference btw .190 and .230?
Seems to me the difference in defense is worth the switch
im not convinced
ciriaco is physically capable of hitting a home run. i know i know homer run numbers are meaningless but the point stands.
He's awful
His AAA hitting numbers are worse than Cedeno’s MLB numbers.
You can't get there by the next inning.
Not only that, but you have to make a roster move unless Cedeno goes on the DL. Cedeno has all kinds of little things happen where he’s out for a few days. We need a real shortstop to be the backup on the team, and Ciriaco is the only one I see that is a real possibility.
by MarkInDallas on Mar 7, 2011 11:52 AM EST up reply actions
eh Id rather give JRod a shot at least at the beginning of the year. thoughts?
We have to unify and watch our flag ascend!
he's not a SS
I’d like for him to stick as a utility guy…so we can keep him. I think he’s an asset to our organization.
But he’s no SS. If Cedeno got hurt, we’d need a replacement. If it’s not Ciriaco, then we’d need to go get someone. He’s effectively the only internal option we have right now.
by insane_sanity on Mar 7, 2011 12:10 PM EST up reply actions
My boss is back today
He said Rodriguez’s fielding was better than Cedeno’s this spring, said he has a gun for an arm too. He said Cedeno has looked terrible in the field while he saw him and just girly like at the plate. He felt his batting average in batting practice would be around .100, he said he was the worse looking player there including the minor leaguers.
Cedeno getting hurt would be doing this team a favor much like Laroche and Aki’s injuries last year.
I am not sure why everyone has a pre existing notion he cant play short stop.
Busy day so I will add his other comments later
by jackiegleason on Mar 7, 2011 12:44 PM EST up reply actions
yeah id like to know this too, i would hope he can play some short, or else we should have taken that pitcher in the Rule V draft. though i forget his name haha
We have to unify and watch our flag ascend!
All we need from Rodriguez is to play maybe 1 game/week at short
If he can handle that, I think he should stick as the Utilily guy. If Cedeno hits the DL, then we make a roster move and call up Ciriaco at that point, but for a day-to-day situation or a rest day here or there for Cedeno, I think Rodriguez is a better option, given that he can play elsewhere and not get the bat knocked out of his hands.
If he can play passable everyday SS defense, then he’ll be a revelation. In fact, I wouldn’t mind it if he started stealing ABs. Not to say he’s the SS of the future, but if he can not be a total abomination in the field, I don’t see how he’s worth less than Cedeno overall. It’s all relative. Then when/if we ever get a real SS, Rodriguez will have proven he can be a potent IF utility guy and occupy that role ably.
Ciriaco still needs to play every day. It will not benefit him, nor the Pirates, if he is sitting on the bench and not playing much.
I understand what you mean by making a move though, and that is a concern.
The other thing I thought about was, if Doumit is traded to Houston (not saying he should, but he could) that could free up as much as $2.5m. That could be used to bring in someone to back-up Cedeno…a more experienced SS. We would then be less deep at C…with Snyder and Jaramillo. If Snyder gets injured…
by insane_sanity on Mar 7, 2011 11:55 AM EST up reply actions
I was not aware that the reason we don’t have a more experienced backup SS was because we were short $2M.
by MarkInDallas on Mar 7, 2011 11:59 AM EST up reply actions
no...
but the reason we don’t J.J. Hardy may very well be Doumit’s $5.1m he’s owed this season.
My point is that Doumit’s contract hinders our financial flexibility (how much, we don’t know). If Cedeno gets hurt the first week of the season…the FO probably won’t be comfortable running Ciriaco out there for the remaining 150 games. They’d then be forced into being a buyer. While I don’t know our financial flexibility…freeing up another $2.5m in salary could very well be $2.5m in contract we eat vs. trading a better prospect for the player.
Again, I did not say we should trade Doumit to free up the money. Just a take on why we could — another benefit.
by insane_sanity on Mar 7, 2011 12:55 PM EST up reply actions
Doumit's $ had nothing to do with not getting Hardy
The Pirates just didn’t want to give up the players in trade needed to get him. They did make an offer to the Twins, so taking on Hardy’s salary wasn’t an issue.
Well ...
it wasn’t just Hardy’s contract.
The Twins also made teams take Brendan Harris and his awful contract.
I think it was far less of the return and far more of how much money are you willing to swallow.
In the end, the Pirates probably did the right thing with Hardy. He got about $6M in arbitration, and Harris was another $3M (and he makes Doumit look useful).
Is Hardy a $9M quality option? That’s a tough chunk of change to swallow.
by Adam Reynolds on Mar 7, 2011 2:13 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
Harris is only due $1.75M in 2011
And the Twins sent $500K along with the deal, so that brings it down to $1.25M to add to Hardy’s deal.
So, $5.85M + $1.25M = $7.10M for a player who is probably going to be a 1-2 WAR upgrade over Cedeno, who is making $2M.
Let’s just say that if taking Harris’ contract was the sticking point for the Pirates, then I have to question the strategy.
We also need PT for Mercer, D’Arnaud, Friday, Ford. At least half of those guys are more important long-term than PC
I havent heard him mentioned since 2008
by white angus on Mar 7, 2011 9:59 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Between Mercer and D'Arnaud
Which do you want to see in Indy?
I assume it makes no sense to carry all 3 MIFs there (at least to start the season), so one of them stays in Altoona. Neither Mercer nor D’Arnaud showed “mastery” at AA, but I’m not sure they both need to stay down, especially with Cain coming up.
Any chance that, if PC doesn’t hit at all in Pgh, they can him and bring up Friday to replace him, and let D’Arnaud and Mercer develop together in Indy?
I think D'Arnaud is the better prospect.
So if it’s one or the other, I’d go with him.
I have a feeling the front office likes Friday at least a little bit. If he starts out well this year, he could easily end up as a short term Plan B if Ciriaco falls flat on his face.
Neither Wimberly or Rodriguez will be able to hold that position down for a prolonged period of time.
Wimberly isn’t a SS, obviously, but what evidence is there at this point that Rodriguez can’t handle it?
He has some holes in his game, some of which may never get fixed (like plate discipline), but filling a bench role on the ML club will not make him any better — it may hinder any development.
I’m relatively skeptical about him having any further development on tap. I think he’s pretty much a finished product at this point, and I’d rather have the SS reps at AAA going to Friday or Mercer or D’Arnaud.
I’d rather have the SS reps at AAA going to Friday or Mercer or D’Arnaud.
I can see that, but was assuming Mercer staying at 3B and Friday at 2B; if Ciriaco stuck w/ the club, I would not be adverse to D’Arnaud playing SS in Indy. His bat struggled a little (versus prior success at previous levels) in Altoona, and if he were to start the season there…I would look to move him soon.
by insane_sanity on Mar 7, 2011 2:43 PM EST up reply actions
Ciriaco still has an option
so Indy he will go but lets not forget that Chase D’Arnaud is waiting in the wings and in his limited action this ST has done a decent job so I hope he doesn’t repeat at Altoona.
Maybe we’ll have a middle INF combo of Ciriaco/D’Arnaud at Indy.
Honestly, I’d like to see them both in Indy as well. You could alternate them in and out at SS and 2B — giving both of them reps at both positions. If they are intent on keeping D’Arnaud at SS though, I’d send him to AA so he gets more reps there. I’d also like to see him hit a little more than the .247 he put up last season.
The question is this: what is Chase D’Arnaud? Is he a SS, or is he a 2B?
by insane_sanity on Mar 7, 2011 9:55 AM EST up reply actions
eshhh Brock Holt to AA at some point? Id like to see what he can do as a regular at a higher level of play. Could be something there.
We have to unify and watch our flag ascend!
I personally would like to see d'Arnaud dominate AA first.
If he shows he is ready to move after a month or two, then great. But what happens if d’Arnaud goes to Indy and falters there? Then you’ve wasted time by rushing him.
by MarkInDallas on Mar 7, 2011 11:55 AM EST up reply actions
not that its a problem but i feel like were starting to get a log jam in the middle infield of players who may or may not pan out. that they may or may not be much more than average or a bench guy in the future. clearly you dont want to rush them but at some point you gotta make a move with some of them.
We have to unify and watch our flag ascend!
We’ve got a “log jam” if we consider everyone a SS. We’ve got a bunch of “fringe” guys (may/may not pan out), while we have very few (if any, really) SOLID SS or SOLID 2B guys. Hell, even Neil Walker wasn’t a 2B…he was a C, then a 3B, then played some OF and 1B. Iwamura’s poor play forced the FO’s hand into bringing up Walker at 2B and here we are.
I think some decisions need made to clean up some of these “log jams”. We seem to have a bunch of future utility-type players.
by insane_sanity on Mar 7, 2011 12:02 PM EST up reply actions
i think its more about pushing forward with the players that have the potential to be at least major league average starters. no reason to discard utility players simply because thats what they are. they could boom at any point and be very valuable. i do agree with you though that we have a bunch of “fringe/utility” type guys at SS/2B
We have to unify and watch our flag ascend!
I think that the policy of keeping players at the most difficult positions muddles our analysis
The FO wants to keep every infielder at SS, and OF at CF until they prove that they can’t handle it. It makes it tough wehn looking at a depth chart and seeing 10 guys listed as SS, and no prospects at 2b. Plus the line between organizational player and prospect is pretty think with some of these guys.
by Wizard of Woz on Mar 7, 2011 1:49 PM EST up reply actions
no prospects at 2b
Guys playing 2B in the minors generally aren’t prospects. That’s why they’re at 2B instead of SS.
But the point is
somebody plays 2B in the majors. I’ve seen them. And at some point those very same guys were in the minors. Presumably someone in the organization knows (or has a pretty strong opinion) which ones are which, but we aren’t privy to that info. Hence the confusion/frustration.
A lot of starting ML 2Bs...
…come up through the minors as SSs, and only move to 2B when they’re at AAA and the ML team realizes that they need a 2B or that the player just can’t play SS to ML standards.
Just as a quick-and-dirty indicator, among last year’s six division winners, four had a starting 2B who came up as a SS and was moved to 2B in AAA (Kinsler, Phillips, Rodriguez, and Sanchez) and two who came up as pure 2Bs (Hudson and Utley).
That's a lower ratio than I thought you were suggesting
Anyway, I totally take your point. All I’m saying is that we’re in the dark somewhat because the people who’ve watched these guys the most almost certainly have a strong idea about which ones are most likely to slide over. If nothing else, if we have 2 guys coming up at once, one an All-Star glove with a 90 OPS+ bat and the other a good glove with a 100 OPS+ bat, one of them will end up at second, even if both would be above-average SS.
This (everything between here and my last post) was what I was getting at. Muddled SS depth chart really equals all/most SS/2B/3B prospects.
by Wizard of Woz on Mar 7, 2011 3:56 PM EST up reply actions
I'd disagree
That’s just looking at it from a defensive standpoint.
IF you consider the bat, there are plenty of guys like Chase Utley, for example, who weren’t playing SS in the minors.
Guys like Utley...
…are more the exception than the rule. See my post above.
Pedroia, Mark Ellis, Kelly Johnson, Clint Barmes… all guys who moved off of SS in AAA.
I don't disagree that most guys do it
But I think if you look over 10 or 20 years, that’s it.
Most.
There are lots of guys who don’t have the arm for SS but who have good bats and play 2b. There are also guys who don’t have the range for SS but who have good bats.
Generally, you are correct.
But I’d quibble, I guess, that it’s the exception. It happens a lot. It’s just slightly less likely.
How much does D'Arnaud need to "dominate" AA?
Hes not Pedro Alvarez with the bat. If D’Arnaud can just hit 260 and get on base 1/3 or more of the time w/ 8-10 HR, he ’ll be a huge upgrade over the teams other shortstops.
by Adam Reynolds on Mar 7, 2011 1:48 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
What I like to see from someone who has a real chance to be a good player in MLB
AVG of .300, OBP of .370, K/AB% of 20% or lower, BB/PA% of 10% or higher.
If d’Arnaud is just going to be another Cedeno in MLB, then who cares? Those kinds of players can be found in our price range on the free agent market. We need to be in the business of developing above average players in the minors, and the way you develop skills is to show mastery at increasingly difficult levels.
Domination may be the wrong term to use, because that implies someone who is hitting for tons of power. Mastery is probably a better word.
If someone can only hit .260 at AA, chances are they will tank completely at AAA.
"Mastery"
Perfect word.
If he’s ready to hit in AAA, he’ll show it pretty quickly in AA. It’s not very likely that he’d hit .260 (or even .275) in AA and then hit acceptably in AAA.
A lot of starting ML 2Bs...
…come up through the minors as SSs, and only move to 2B when they’re at AAA and the ML team realizes that they need a 2B or that the player just can’t play SS to ML standards.
Just as a quick-and-dirty indicator, among last year’s six division winners, four had a starting 2B who came up as a SS and was moved to 2B in AAA (Kinsler, Phillips, Rodriguez, and Sanchez) and two who came up as pure 2Bs (Hudson and Utley).
high standards
Unless you think Tony Sanchez is the only hitter in our system who has a real chance of being a good MLB player, your standards are too high. There are plenty of players who are better hitters than Ronny Cedeno who don’t post the kinds of MiL numbers you’re expecting from good players. Like, for instance, Andrew McCutchen, Neil Walker, Jose Tabata, and Pedro Alvarez.
There are no one-size-fits-all criteria. In d’Arnaud’s case, he made the leap to AA last year and posted basically the same numbers he had in A ball the year before except for a lower BAbip. He doesn’t really have anything left to prove in AA, and I will be extremely disappointed if he returns there to start 2011. Fortunately, from the fact that he’s in ML ST and is getting a bunch of PT, it appears that not only is he headed for AAA but he’s above Friday, Mercer, Harrison, etc. on the depth chart. I’m happy about that, because I personally think d’Arnaud is the best long-term SS option in our system.
McCutchen, Walker and Tabata all posted those types of numbers in the AAA season before their call ups.
Cutch .303/.361 8% BB/PA 12% K/AB (.190 ISO)
Walker .321/.392 10% BB/PA 18% K/AB (.240 ISO)
Tabata .308/.373 9% BB/PA 16% K/AB (.116 ISO)
Alvarez did not post quite those numbers, and that was one reason I thought he might need more time in AAA. He was gaining in skill pretty rapidly down there, though. The trick is to gage the skill level at the time.
Although d’Arnaud got better as the year went on, he never really established consistency in his performance. You see in this 10 game average chart of his production that he had large valleys in both July and August where he struggled, but also had nice bursts of excellence as well. The general trend was upwards, but to me just didn’t show mastery.
by MarkInDallas on Mar 7, 2011 10:25 PM EST up reply actions
okay
But all of those players also had seasons at other levels where they didn’t post those types of numbers and were promoted anyway, because they had the skills to make the move even if it wasn’t reflected in the specific stats that you like to look at. Besides which, a .361 OBP and 8% walk rate (to take Cutch, for example) isn’t the same as a .370 OBP and 10% walk rate. If your “standards” aren’t really standards, that’s fine. I agree that there shouldn’t be one-size-fits-all criteria and that the trick is to gauge skill level rather than blindly applying statistical benchmarks.
Any player is going to have good and bad ten-game stretches over the course of a full season. That really doesn’t say much about a players’ skill level. In d’Arnaud’s case, again, he performed well at AA last year except for a lower-than-usual BAbip. That’s not a good reason to hold him back. He’s a good player with decent tools and good skills and making him repeat AA is just wasting everybody’s time.
I see the standards as somewhat liquid depending on the kind of hitter you are talking about.
For example, a low ISO hitter is going to have a lower walk rate and should compensate for that with a lower K rate and higher AVG.
You are right that Cutch didn’t quite hit the OBP in AAA, but he did continue to improve in MLB and raised that even further. There are things stats can’t tell you, of course.
As for d’Arnaud in 2010, you can’t blame a low BABIP in the minors on poor luck, because BABIP at those levels is considered to be a measure of skill.
Yes, the Littlefield regime did promote prospects before they really mastered a level, but that’s probably not the best model to follow. I’m hopeful that the current regime is a bit better than that.
by MarkInDallas on Mar 8, 2011 12:21 AM EST up reply actions
liquid
Then we’re in agreement. There shouldn’t be any one-size-fits-all standards, and there are things that a checklist of four stats can’t tell you.
I never mentioned luck in re: d’Arnaud’s BAbip, but BAbip at any level, like any stat, is partly skill and partly luck/random variation. And BAbip is more luck than most stats, at any level. But I’m not saying d’Arnaud should be promoted because he got unlucky. What I’m saying is that d’Arnaud should be promoted because he has the skills and tools to take the next step. He controls the strike zone, makes contact, hits the ball hard, and runs well. Defensively, he has good footwork and decent range. The only things holding him back from being a ML SS right now are inconsistency in fielding routine balls and experience against better pitchers. Making him repeat AA isn’t going to help him with either of those things.
Statistically, he took the leap from A ball to AA last year and maintained his K rate and ISO. He dropped some walks but still posted a good BB rate. The only thing to complain about, statistically, is that he had a low BAbip. I don’t think we should be holding back talented players for posting abnormally low BAbips. Whether it was luck or not, we should not be expecting d’Arnaud, with his speed and hard-contact ability, to continue posting BAbips below .300, and it would be a waste of time to make him prove us right about that at AA.
About Littlefield vs. Huntington, well, it was Huntington who promoted Alvarez to AA when he was hitting .249/.344/.490 and striking out 25% of the time in A ball. Nice try attempting to align my position with the Littlefield era, but it doesn’t really work like that. Any organization will promote players when they are ready, and being ready is not as simple as a checklist of a couple of stats you like. I understand where you’re coming from: BA and K rate and BB rate are important stats for hitting prospects, but as you’ve already admitted, there can’t be any cut-and-dried, one-size-fits-all statistical standards for when to promote hitters. If you take that approach, you’re going to miss the boat on guys like d’Arnaud (or Tabata or McCutchen or Walker or Alvarez, etc., at various points in their careers) who should advance despite mediocre numbers. In fact, like I already said, if you’re waiting for .300 BA and .370 OBP and 10% BB rate and 20% K rates, you’re not going to be promoting many guys at all. If you stick to that rule, Tony Sanchez would be the only guy moving up a level this year.
As for d’Arnaud in 2010, you can’t blame a low BABIP in the minors on poor luck, because BABIP at those levels is considered to be a measure of skill.
BABIP is a skill for hitters at all levels, majors and minors. It’s a high-variance skill, but hitters have a true-talent number around which they tend to cluster performances, and the number is different for different hitters.
C Shint: now we’re discussing issues I’d LOVE to have — lower level guys pushing upper level guys. How long has it been since we’ve had that problem?
by insane_sanity on Mar 7, 2011 11:59 AM EST up reply actions
well thats the point. its a great problem to have, but we cant just sit and wait around for every player to dominate at the level they are at each and every year. at some point or another a player is going to have to get bumped up or down or something
We have to unify and watch our flag ascend!
ok
What I’m saying is this:
Ciriaco is our 2nd best SS (behind Cedeno) — we can argue this fact, but right now he is #2 on the depth chart. I’m saying that the #2 needs reps. He’s not a 33 year old vet — he’s a 25 yr old kid that had much to work on. He’d be better off working on things in AAA, with reps and at bats, than sitting in Pittsburgh.
If D’Arnaud is the #3, he needs reps too. I understand what you’re saying about promoting guys, but reps are more important right now. If D’Arnaud tears up AA and Ciriaco tears up AAA…perhaps Cedeno ends up the odd guy out.
I understand what you’re saying, and don’t mean to discount it, but reps are very important…
by insane_sanity on Mar 7, 2011 12:09 PM EST up reply actions
reps are more important for the younger guys...
but Ciriaco is old enough now, and has enough experiene, where that shouldn’t be an issue. He doesn’t hit with a full seasons worth of reps so coming off the bench once week won’t be a big deal. I’m not too sure what your point is with Ciriaco since he is very likely to make the roster as a backup becaue he is the only legitimate SS option. I think Wimberly and JRod are cometing for another spot. Doumit gets another one. And the final one will be bewtween Pearce, Fields, Atkins or Bowker.
I should have stated “in my opinion”…but we can argue anything you’d like.
I feel that our FO has him as the #2 SS on the depth chart right now. He has performed well thus far this spring in the opportunities granted to him, which will only solidify our FOs view. As far as he goes, though, I’m not comfortable putting him on the ML squad…only being able to play SS (with a little 2B experience) — I feel we need more versatility than that on the roster. I also feel that, if he is the #2 SS in their mind, having him play regularly would be important to me. I can see the argument of having him stay in Pittsburgh, sending Wimberly down for seasoning though.
If you look at our 25 man roster, we’re going to have our 8 fielded positions plus Doumit and Jones already taking up 2 bench spots. If we carry 14 position players, and keep J. Rodriguez (3B, SS, 2B), we’ve only got 3 spots to fill. Pearce would give us a RH bat to play 1B opposite Overbay, plus he can play some OF; Bowker would give us a LH bat (that can play OF) with some pop on the bench as well.
I think a lot of my opinions are geared towards not putting a ton of pressure on Rodriguez this season — I think I’m “hiding” him at the ML level this season…and not trying to rely on any extensive production.
(All of this is a 14/11 pos player vs. pitcher split.)
by insane_sanity on Mar 7, 2011 2:28 PM EST up reply actions
true
I think Pearce has to stick — he’d be a RH hitting 1B/OF…unless we’d want that position filled by Doumit.
I did take note of Bowker — we’d have Jones and Doumit on the bench, so he could be cancelled out. If we removed Bowker, there would be room for one more (unless we go 13/12, and add a relief pitcher)
by insane_sanity on Mar 7, 2011 2:39 PM EST up reply actions
As far as he goes, though, I’m not comfortable putting him on the ML squad…only being able to play SS (with a little 2B experience)
If you can play SS, you can play any other infield position. You don’t need much “experience” at 2B or 3B to handle 2B or 3B if you’re a good SS defender. A couple days’ worth of ground balls, and congratulations, you now meet the minimum standard of competency at 2B/3B.
sending Wimberly down for seasoning
Wimberly doesn’t need “seasoning”. He’s a 27-year-old in his seventh professional season. If they send him down, it’s because he just isn’t good enough.
I think a lot of my opinions are geared towards not putting a ton of pressure on Rodriguez this season — I think I’m "hiding" him at the ML level this season…and not trying to rely on any extensive production.
How much pressure is there, being a bench player on a crappy team? And if Rodriguez can’t handle even that minimal “pressure”, why carry him at all?
"minimum standard"
But the point is that Ciriaco doesn’t have enough bat to warrant a bench spot on that basis alone – it’s his defense that makes him worth having. Being just minimally competent at 2 of the 3 positions you’ll ever be called on to play isn’t much of a skillset. And it’s not clear to me what harm comes from giving the guy some time (even just a month, really) at 2B in Indy.
As for “pressure” on Rodriguez, my take is that it’s more a matter of not wanting to actually rely on him. By definition, as a Rule 5 guy, he’s at least somewhat over his head. If you want to argue that playing guys over their head as much as possible is a sound developmental strategy, that’s fine, but I’d like to see some evidence.
Being just minimally competent at 2 of the 3 positions you’ll ever be called on to play isn’t much of a skillset.
He’d be “minimally competent” for about a week and a half, and then gradually improve from there.
And it’s not clear to me what harm comes from giving the guy some time (even just a month, really) at 2B in Indy.
It would involve him taking PT at 2B away from other, better prospects.
By definition, as a Rule 5 guy, he’s at least somewhat over his head.
Not really, no. If he were some raw kid from A-ball, that’d be the case, but he just finished a full year at AAA. He’s as ready as any other player being promoted from AAA would be. That’s part of the advantage of taking an advanced guy like Rodriguez in the Rule 5 – you don’t have to mollycoddle him, because he’s genuinely ready for the challenge.
D'Arnaud would still be the Indy SS
That’s my whole point. I agree 300% that Ciriaco shouldn’t be playing SS at Indy.
The way I see it is that you start the year with D’Arnaud at Altoona until he wOBAs above .330 (or whatever), Friday at SS in Indy, and Ciriaco at 2B in Indy. After a month, reassess.
That said, I may be missing a MiL middle IF, and I agree with Charlie’s original point that there’s probably no good reason to carry Wimberly, at which point you clearly carry Rodriguez and Ciriaco, giving the latter some intense 2B (and 3B, I suppose) instruction in order to maximize his defensive value, since his offensive value is close to nil.
My comment got pushed down so far but really why would you want Ciriaco at 2B at all? If JRod can play 2B sufficiently, his bat will far outweigh Pedro’s D. The only reason he is making the roster is because no one else can play SS (I’m assuming Josh cannot for the purpose of this discussion). We aren’t looking for MORE opportunities to get his .650 OPS into the lineup.
You're probably right
My feeling is that the max value PC can provide is as a plus defender at 2-3 positions (does he have the arm for 3B?), and so we should do what we can, developmentally, to help him reach that max value. But, given the presence of Rodriguez, there’s a good argument that PC is nothing but an insurance policy at SS until either JR proves that he can handle it for a couple starts at a time or D’Arnaud (or whoever) prove that they can handle it for a couple weeks at a time. In which case, we don’t especially care about maximizing his value.
If you can play SS, you can play any other infield position. You don’t need much "experience" at 2B or 3B to handle 2B or 3B if you’re a good SS defender. A couple days’ worth of ground balls, and congratulations, you now meet the minimum standard of competency at 2B/3B.
I disagree. While the skill set may be one that can be transitioned to any IF position, it is not as simple as “a couple days’ worth of ground balls” — especially at the ML level. Most transitions take place in the minors; AA, AAA…give them experience there before you expect them to play in the ML — learn the situational side of the position, different footwork, etc.
How much pressure is there, being a bench player on a crappy team? And if Rodriguez can’t handle even that minimal "pressure", why carry him at all?
The pressure I am talking about is the Pirates having to rely on him extensively if the need arose. You don’t typically count on a Rule 5 guy to come in and start in your IF — or to be the 1st choice of replacement if someone goes down. Maybe we’re just that bad that he may end up being that.
Agreed on Wimberly though — lost track of his age.
by insane_sanity on Mar 7, 2011 3:53 PM EST up reply actions
You don’t typically count on a Rule 5 guy to come in and start in your IF — or to be the 1st choice of replacement if someone goes down.
You usually don’t have the opportunity to take a SS as pedigreed and highly-developed as Rodriguez in the Rule 5, either. Most Rule 5 infield picks are skinny Dominican kids from A-ball who can pick it but who have never seen a slider or a curve thrown consistently for strikes. So they get used as PRs and defensive replacements because that’s where all their present skills are concentrated. Rodriguez is different.
I do love the pick
Despite what I said earlier, I agree that Rodriguez is an exceptional Rule 5 guy. If Ciriaco were looking worse in ST, I’d be open to dropping him below Rodriguez on the depth chart.
I'd go even farther
I’d like the Bucs to drop Ciriaco.
I don’t see him having any role with the team beyond this year.
I certainly wouldn’t lose anybody I liked to keep him on the 40-man roster.
Ciriaco
I don’t see him having any role with the team beyond this year.
I’d disagree with that. My best case scenario is the JRod wins the SS job sometime this season, preferably early. Ciriaco has an option this year, and can be the backup SS next year and beyond. His defense seems legit, and while his hitting isnt great, it’s good to have options…
I said above
That if JRod can cover SS for a few days in the event of a nagging injury, that will be valuable. If he can play good enough SS D to cover for a DL stint without having to call up Ciriaco or whoever else to play SS daily, then he’s likely good enough to win the SS job outright. In that case, he’ll be a steal.
If not, no big deal. Send him back and keep Ciriaco on the bench as the utility guy. But you gotta give him the chance first, especially because he can hit like a male of the species.
Well ...
it kinds of depends on how you look at him. Here’s my logic:
Mario Mendoza, of Mendoza line fame, had an .ops of .705 in his AAA season.
Ciriaco had an ops of .660 in Indy last year.
So if Ciriaco improves significantly at the plate, he could hit as well as Mendoza.
I guess I don’t see that being very useful, regardless of how well the glove plays. And it looks average to me.
Completely agree on 40 man
I just don’t think we’re at any risk in that direction. There are at least a couple guys on the 40 man who are even more disposable, if only because Ciriaco has at least one ML-level skill, and a rare one (SS defense, obvs). That doesn’t make him super-valuable, but compare that with a No Relation, who, at best, can sometimes get a dozen outs without giving up more than a run or two.
Actually, looking at the 40-man just now, there’s a lot less chum than there used to be. Still ~5 guys who could go without much risk of regret, but I don’t think I’d say there’s more than 2 or 3 who don’t belong at all.
Ciriaco only should go to Indianapolis if he has starter potential
The front office has seen enough of Ciriaco at this point that they should know whether he has the potential to be a starter or not. From what I have seen, he does not have the potential to be an average starting shortstop in the major leagues. I think he can be an average backup utility infielder. At Triple-A you have D’Arnaud who should be starting and playing short every day. You don’t waste that spot on Ciriaco. If Rodriguez makes the big league team and you want to keep Ciriaco then send him down and play as a backup to D’Arnaud.
Ciriaco
If the FO believes that D’Arnaud is going to be a SS, then why not send him to AAA as the SS…and Ciriaco to AAA as the 2B?
If Ciriaco is destined to be a UTIL guy, send him down to AAA to hone those skills. Similar to Neil Walker, bounce Ciriaco to different positions to gain some experience. Like Wimberly, his speed would play well with the ML club…he just needs to become more versatile.
by insane_sanity on Mar 7, 2011 11:07 AM EST up reply actions
Normally getting someone reps in AAA means
you think their bat is going to need to be kept fresh or that there is some future benefit to them improving their hitting. I don’t know that you can say that about Ciriaco. He really has done pretty well in MLB with the bat in the chances he has gotten. He’s a contact guy that doesn’t need a lot of reps, from what I can see. There’s not much more that’s going to be gained from getting him reps, IMO.
Neil Walker was a totally different story because of the power component.
by MarkInDallas on Mar 7, 2011 11:39 AM EST up reply actions
What about defensive reps at 2B?
That argument caught my eye. Certainly if he’s destined for UT, I’d just as soon see him get as much real life experience at 2B as possible.
If Walker goes down,
I’d probably rather have Ciriaco at SS and Cedeno slide over to 2B. But regardless, Ciriaco could probably roll out of bed with a hangover and play 2B pretty well. He just needs reps in practice.
Because his D is so stellar
or because 2B is that much easier? I mean, I get that anyone who can be a good ML SS can be a good ML 2B. But the idea that it requires literally no preparation* seems unsound to me, at least if your goal is to have a good 2B.
I guess it gets back to what the goal is from Ciriaco at 2B. If all you want is a guy with more range than Neil who won’t drop DP balls, then I’m sure you’re right. But if the goal is for your no-bat bench player to be something more than a negative WAR defensive sub, then I think some serious training would be useful.
- that’s how I’m reading “reps in practice.” Maybe you – and Vlad – really mean “intense work with a skilled instructor” and it just sounds like you mean “20 minutes of taking grounders each day for a week.”
literally no preparation
Not “no preparation”, but not as much preparation as you seem to think, either.
Remember last year, when everybody freaked out about Clement’s glove at 1B being ready for the start of the year, and then he was fine and all the hand-waving looked dumb in retrospect? This is the same kind of deal.
I recall it vividly
And I was certainly wrong about that. Although I do recall that the guy who ended up playing a lot of 1B was absolutely terrible there, even though he’s an adequate defender in RF.
And actually, Clement worked his ass off in ST transitioning to 1B. If Ciriaco were doing that for 2B right now, I wouldn’t hesitate for a moment to keep him up here as UT*. But if he’s getting that, I haven’t heard about it (not being facetious – I certainly could be missing it. But no one in this thread has suggested that it’s happening, so I’m guessing that it’s not).
- and, to be clear, I’m not strongly opposed anyway. I’m just thinking that there’s an argument for getting him some MiL reps at 2B, and I want stronger arguments than “every SS can play great 2B in his sleep” as to why he shouldn’t.
It’s much, much easier for a SS to learn 2B than it is for a C to learn 1B.
The only real differences are the angle and touch on the throw, the footwork on the bag, and the positioning on cutoffs and the like. Even if a SS-turned-2B is a little rough on those things at the start, the fact that he’s got a SS’s range and reactions and arm will make up for the occasional bad reaction.
I wouldn’t be at all surprised if you stuck Ciriaco at 2B tomorrow and he looked better there than Walker, given Ciriaco’s huge edge in range and reaction time.
Walker's not a great comp
I certainly agree that Ciriaco could out-defend him on the fly. Indeed, I’d bet that Ciriaco has played more 2B (if only in pick-up games) in his life than Walker had as of last June.
I do appreciate the point that his other skills/abilities help make up for his lack of experience/comfort. OTOH, if he fucks up the wheel play (which he’s never done in a game before) once, that can be enough to cost you a game.
As I say, if he’s getting serious work and instruction, then I’m much less concerned about MiL experience. I just want to know that it’s happening, and that they’re not simply relying on his inherent SSitude to cover all sins.
I certainly agree that Ciriaco could out-defend him on the fly.
So if Ciriaco is plainly a better 2B defender than the current everyday 2B, why are we worrying about whether or not he’s defensively capable as a backup there?
Because he's not going to OPS above .800
And because we just spent the entire offseason wishing and begging that NH would get the current everyday 2B off of that position? You of all people should appreciate how low NFW has set the defensive bar at 2B.
"reps"
JRoth95: my idea of “reps” includes not only the full instruction that the minors offers, but also real game-speed repetitions at the position. Move from SS to 2B — you can take as many practice throws as you’d like, but having to accept a throw from that side is different, and more different with the runner on his way.
You can’t just take grounders at another position and all of the sudden become that position (I don’t care what position you’re moving off of, and which you’re moving to). There is footwork involved, there is situational baseball that is different for each position, etc. This stuff takes time, and THAT is why they typically transition players in the minors…and not at the ML level.
by insane_sanity on Mar 7, 2011 4:01 PM EST up reply actions
Reps in practice means
working with an instructor on the DP turn especially. And of course the positioning is different, etc. But all of those things can be done in a practice situation. You can simulate game situations with much more frequency in practice than it would actually happen in a game.
Why does Langosh
have to write “multiple times”? What’s wrong with “many times,” except it’s shorter and is a more common word, so she won’t sound as smart?
pet peeve
Plus
50 bonus points for using all her letters, I guess, unless she played it around “tip.”
Well she does wear glasses
Bet she has 20/20 vision. Hipster.
by ATribeCalledGreg on Mar 7, 2011 10:57 AM EST up reply actions
Ron Musselman(sp) at PG wrote ......
Ricky Romero scattered 1 hit over 4 innings ……..How do you scatter 1 hit over 4 innings?
That would be like somebody saying " Look at that messy desk you have 1 piece of paper scattered all over it ! "
by oldfrothingslosh on Mar 7, 2011 1:08 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
The cliche is bad enough, but that is just lazy
by Wizard of Woz on Mar 7, 2011 1:53 PM EST up reply actions
You’ll occasionally have guys like Nyjer Morgan and Willy Taveras who have Wimberly’s basic hitting profile and manage to succeed for a couple years, but those guys are often exceptional defenders, and Wimberly doesn’t appear to be
Another difference is that Morgan and Taveras are four inches taller than Wimberly, and that’s going by Wimberly’s listed height. They’re just bigger, stronger guys, albeit slap hitters. That may just give them marginally more ability to succeed at a level where most of the pitchers have the capability of overpowering hitters.
If Wimberly makes the team, it’s going to be more a question of whether they want to carry both him and Rodriguez. In an ideal world, I’d like to see them go with one UT infielder, because I prefer to have as much offense as possible on the bench and there’s already going to be a zero-offense roster spot devoted to a backup catcher if Doumit is traded. But they have to have somebody who can play short, because of Cedeno’s propensity for minor, day-to-day type injuries (like right now, for instance). I don’t think they have to have a glove guy to start 2-3 games once a month, but they have to have a guy who’s at least marginal out there. Everything I’ve ever read about Wimberly says he can’t play short and I think we’re seeing that now. So the real issue is/should be whether it’s worth carrying Wimberly for his speed and ability to play CF, which means carrying one fewer of the bats out of the Atkins(yuk)/Pearce/Fields/etc. group. If Wimberly isn’t going to get on base, it’s not worth it.
You're entitled to your own opinions. You're not entitled to your own facts.
If you put a gun to my head...
…I’d probably rather have Wimberly than Atkins. Neither would probably hit much, but at least Wimberly would be fun to watch since he’s fast.
Pearce, of course, is another story entirely.
You wouldn’t have to put a gun to my head. I’d just as soon have an empty roster spot as Atkins.
You're entitled to your own opinions. You're not entitled to your own facts.
you don't think he has any shot of returning to 2007-2008 form?
i don’t either necessarily but i think he’s worth a look.
you don’t think he has any shot of returning to 2007-2008 form?
No.
For accuracy’s sake, his 2007 (113 OPS+) and 2008 (96 OPS+) are totally different things. That said, I don’t think he can get back to even the lesser of the two. He was just flat-out awful in 2009 and 2010. The skills aren’t there anymore.
What Vlad said
Atkins is a Coors creation. Always was. Here’s his yearly road OPS from 2005-09:
.649
.933
.773
.661
.624
In 2010, of course, he didn’t anybody anywhere. One very good year, one mediocre year, and the rest terrible. Basically, he had the classic career peak at ages 26-27, and everything else was either Coors or crap. It’s Craig Monroe all over again, only Monroe was better.
You're entitled to your own opinions. You're not entitled to your own facts.
by WTM on Mar 7, 2011 3:37 PM EST up reply actions
Appreciate the clarification
But a 96 OPS+ is at least bench-worthy. Whereas his post-08 form is, as you say, flat-out awful.
But a 96 OPS+ is at least bench-worthy.
Maybe, maybe not. Along with his other problems, Atkins is a poor-to-ghastly defender at 3B.
Please, pretty please let someone bring up his stats away from Coors.
It gets me every time. I picture Vlad the Impaler, on a horse with a spear, chasing down a fawn. I love it.
by Wizard of Woz on Mar 7, 2011 4:03 PM EST up reply actions
What's the point?
I spent like 200 posts on it last time, and nobody listened anyway.
If people are just bound and determined to look at road numbers the wrong way, I guess there’s not much I can do about it.
I know.
I like watching the 3 Stooges sometimes, though there is no point. Silly violence without consequences, slapstick and non-thought at its best. You already know what’s coming, but it is still entertaining. Also, a little comeuppance can be fun to watch. We’ve all gotten ours at some point. Its just like watching someone running into a wall. And you are the wall, with quips.
by Wizard of Woz on Mar 7, 2011 4:17 PM EST up reply actions
Pearce obtained an extra 4th option recently
So Indy he will go…..take that to the bank.
Pearce has a chance to stick...
no one is screwing him over, for petes sake. unfortunately for him, Overbay right now is having a good spring
no one is screwing him over, for petes sake.
Better enjoy saying that while you have the chance. Once he plays well and gets shoved down to AAA for yet another year in spite of it, you’ll have to retire that litany.
He’s got to start playing well first. There’s plenty of time, but he’s not exactly setting the world on fire yet.
Right. I’m just saying that if he does get sent down, it doesn’t necessarily mean he deserved a spot. They may want to send him down because he has yet to get the timing back. Now, if he hits .300+ in AAA and only comes up in September, then you’ve got a gripe.
and no, there is no gripe if he does that well in AAA.
pearce has never taken the chances he has had and ran with them. injuries, i admit, have been the reason for some of those issues, but lets face it, he hasnt really done anything.
and despite what you think, i DO want pearce to suceed and prove me wrong.
cmon, steven… make angus eat his words.
One thing Pearce HAS done in MLB
is hit LHPs very well. Every single time he’s been called up, he has had excellent numbers against LHPs. So, that makes him an excellent compliment to Overbay at 1B.
but as of today, hes not in a platoon with Overbay?
why? because he hasnt done anything in MLB, thats why. he really hasnt stood out in AAA either. he hasnt stunk, but he hasnt shined. hes pretty much a right handed “meh”
A .396 wOBA in 129 PAs is nothing?
He’s not in a platoon right now simply because Overbay was brought in to be the starter, and only if Overbay shows that a platoon is warranted is Pearce going to get a chance at it.
But I guarantee you that Pearce will hit better than Overbay against LHPs.
by MarkInDallas on Mar 7, 2011 10:42 PM EST up reply actions
129 PA?
If 129 PA over the course of four years isn’t nothing, it’s awfully close.
For the Pirates Prospects Annual, Matt Bandi regressed the platoon splits for all the Pirate hitters in order to project platoon splits. He projects Pearce as .328 wOBA and Overbay as .302 wOBA against LHP. There’s not enough evidence here for any sort of guarantee, and there’s barely enough evidence to even suggest a platoon in the first place.
A .026 wOBA difference is only 4-5 runs over a full season’s worth of PA against LHP. If you think Overbay’s significantly better than Pearce on defense, it’s not even worth platooning them.
I have a lot of trouble with the idea that Pearce has earned anything in the way of ML playing time or that the Pirates are somehow mistreating him or not giving him a fair shot. Like angus says, he just has never really done anything that suggests he should be on a ML roster. He hasn’t hit in the majors and even at AAA he’s a career .281/.355/.478 hitter, and he’s done that entirely in his age 24-27 seasons. There’s nothing at all special about that.
AND his power has gone down considerably at each higher level
once again, i dont dislike Pearce or his game, i just dont think hes being screwed by the FO, which is utterly ridiculous. makes it sound like management doesnt want its players to succeed or something!!!
cmon Pearce, prove me wrong, brudder!
AND his power has gone down considerably at each higher level
Not really, no. Look at the trend in his MLB ISO by year:
2010: .138 (38 PA)
2009: .164 (186 PA)
2008: .174 (119 PA)
2007: .103 (73 PA)
Pearce showed good power in 2008 and 2009, and only had a small amount of ML PT last year (a level of granularity at which adding or subtracting one XBH makes a substantial difference). He looks like he’s not hitting for power because of his 2007 ML numbers, which distort his career record, but four-year-old performance doesn’t carry any real weight in forward projections. For 2008-2010, he’s at .165 in MLB. That’s only eight points below Overbay’s career ISO.
How about Pearce’s power trends at AAA?
2008: .166 ISO, 433 PA
2009: .216 ISO, 317 PA
2010: .209 ISO, 158 PA
No real signs of any slippage there.
what about his power numbers BEFORE he got called up to Indy and Pitt
he HAS come back down to earth. usually when a player shows much more power in the lower minors than AAA/MLB, he doesnt hang around long.
and this is where you go find a handful of players who DID hang around and prove me wrong.
>:P
what about his power numbers BEFORE he got called up to Indy and Pitt
Not really representative, since he was a college pick playing against younger competition. That’s why you need to consider age-relative-to-level when setting expectations for a hitter.
That said, the totality of his minor league record suggests that he’s a starting-caliber ML 1B (though not a star). Which is why he’s getting screwed if he starts yet another season at AAA.
I mean, look at it:
In 2006, he hit 12 HR in 41 games as a 23-year-old in the Sally League, and in 2007, he hit 11 HR in 19 games as a 24-year-old in A+. You can’t look at those contexts and expect that performance to translate forward in linear fashion.
I just crushed my 2 year old at Scrabble
The little cretin could have put syzygy on a triple word score but put the g on a double letter instead. Sucker!
by JRoth95 on Mar 9, 2011 10:33 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Everyone is better against lesser competition.
The thing that made Pearce a legit prospect (and continues to make him a player worthy of a role on the ML club) is that he continued playing well once he matched up against age-appropriate competition at AA and AAA.
no
When even the rosiest projections suggest you’re a league average hitter, you are not a starting-caliber 1B (unless you’re a gold glover). What that suggests is that you’re a AAAA player, which is why Pearce is not getting screwed no matter where he starts the season.
When even the rosiest projections suggest you’re a league average hitter…
Half of MLB’s starters are below-average for their position. That doesn’t mean that they don’t deserve to be starting. This isn’t Lake Wobegon – not everybody gets to be above average.
Pearce projects as being just as good as Overbay this year, after you consider both bat and glove. If Overbay “deserves” to be a starter, so does Pearce. And that doesn’t even consider the extra four million bucks we’re blowing on Overbay…
One thing Pearce HAS done in MLB is hit LHPs very well. Every single time he’s been called up, he has had excellent numbers against LHPs. So, that makes him an excellent compliment to Overbay at 1B
Over time, almost all RHBs will regress toward the same platoon ratio. You’re probably complementing him for a statistical artifact.
That said, he probably still is a better 1B choice vs. LHP than Overbay. Just not as much of one as his career platoon numbers would suggest.
Right
I’m actually not suggesting that he would continue hitting .400 wOBA against LHPs forever, especially if he hits so little against LHPs. What I’m saying is that Overbay is probably going to hit under .330 wOBA against LHPs, and Pearce can certainly do better than that.
However, I do think it’s probable that Overbay does hit RHPs better than Pearce does, whatever that number of wOBA that Pearce eventually gravitates towards.
try over 300 AB’s and an OBP just over 310.
And in the minors, he’s got more than 2,000 AB with an OBP a hair under .370. But I guess those don’t count, for some reason.
it counts
But his AAA OBP is just .355. In four years of AAA, his batting line is .281/.355/.478. For a 1b, that’s just not that impressive, especially considering that he did it in his age 24-27 seasons. There’s a reason that even the projection systems that “like” him think he’s only a league average hitter.
I think it’s possible that Pearce could be a decent platoon/bench bat for a couple seasons, but I don’t think anyone’s screwing him by not handing him that role based on his track record to date.
But his AAA OBP is just .355.
And trending up signifcantly, don’t forget, accompanied by significant gains in K and BB rates. His .312 in 2008 tells you a lot less in predictive terms than his .373 in 2009 and .428 in 2010.
His 2009 and 2010 together are in about the same sample size as his 2008, and since they’re much more recent, they’re significantly better predictive tools.
yes
They’re more predictive, yes, but not to the amount that I think you’re implying. When a guy has to repeat a level three times to get to the point where he’s putting up excellent numbers, that’s not a good sign for future ML success, especially when he’s repeating the level in the (theoretical) prime of his career.
Like I said above, even the optimistic projection systems think he’s a league average hitter. A 1B who hits for league average isn’t very valuable unless he’s an excellent defender. We only had to pay Overbay 1/5 and he’s got an excellent defensive reputation and he’s proven himself at the ML level for years.
I’ll admit once again that it’s very possible that Pearce could be a decent platoon/bench bat for a couple years, but he’s certainly not a starting-caliber 1B, as you say above, and he hasn’t really done anything to distinguish himself from guys like Marte, Fields, Atkins, or Bowker, with whom he’s fighting for a bench spot. It’s hard to see this as a case of him getting screwed.
the bad thing for pearce fans on here is that overbay is playing very well this spring..
while Pearce has not…
speaking of Pearce...
didnt he play 3B in the “B” game today? anyone have any info about the game??? i heard Morneau hit a bases clearing double, but nothing else about it.
When a guy has to repeat a level three times to get to the point where he’s putting up excellent numbers, that’s not a good sign for future ML success, especially when he’s repeating the level in the (theoretical) prime of his career.
Pearce didn’t have to repeat the level three times. The team chose to make him repeat it after he’d already demonstrated mastery. That’s on them, not him.
A 1B who hits for league average isn’t very valuable unless he’s an excellent defender.
I didn’t say he was “very valuable”. I said he was a starting-caliber player (which he is – he’s one of the best 30 1Bs in baseball right now), and that he was capable of delivering Overbay-type value at a significantly lower price than Overbay (which, again, duh). Whenever you argue against Pearce’s credentials, you do just as much damage to Overbay’s, since they’re essentially the same player on the basis of talent. You really can’t do anything about the financial difference, though. Five million bucks is five million bucks (i.e. about 10% of our ML payroll).
he’s proven himself at the ML level for years
So has Willie Mays. Should we sign him to start for us in center field?
Veterans with established track records are no more intrinsically reliable than any other player.
I would rather have Gift Nogphe (sp)....
than Wimberly, neither can hit but he’s shorter and has a better story.
by oldfrothingslosh on Mar 7, 2011 1:33 PM EST reply actions
If that's your criteria
then we may as well give Danny DeVito a shot.
by Wizard of Woz on Mar 7, 2011 1:54 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Too bad
whoever was on radio couldn’t pronounce his frikkin’ name correctly.
Free your ass and your mind will follow.
by cocktailsfor2 on Mar 7, 2011 1:56 PM EST up reply actions
Really?
Jeez, how hard is it to say “Gift”?
by azibuck on Mar 7, 2011 3:01 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
It is pronounced just like it is spelled
Nagh-een-a-na-jar
Naheenanajar, how hard is that?
by Wizard of Woz on Mar 7, 2011 4:05 PM EST up reply actions
Huntington and Andrew McCutchen last April.
NH: Andrew, due to Daniel McCutchen making the opening day roster we’re going to have to change your jersey name to ‘A. McCutchen’
Cutch: Why should I change my name? He’s the one that sucks.
by Mr. E on Mar 7, 2011 9:04 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Mine was an office space ref too!!!
Where’s my Rec?!?!?!?
by Wizard of Woz on Mar 8, 2011 8:51 AM EST up reply actions
Sounds like a just for men commercial
starring WALT FRAZIER
by Wizard of Woz on Mar 8, 2011 1:53 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I'm not really convinced Wimberly could fake SS in an emergency situation..
After watching yesterday he looked like a total disaster. Three balls were hit directly to him. The overthrow error, and then two nice picks by Fields. Easily could’ve been three errors. Wimberly was able to get to the bag quickly on a pickoff attempt, but I don’t think that’s enough to warrant consideration.
Ciriaco’s the clear SS backup at this point. He plays the best defense of any SS on the team, and so far he has hit the best of any SS this Spring.
From there, it’s Rodriguez or Wimberly. I’d like to wait and see how things develop the rest of Spring obviously, but on track records alone I’d go Rodriguez.
Nice idea to give Wimberly a shot.
Speed may be an undervalued commodity in MLB. But then he went 0-12 with poor defense… Not much you can do with that.
by Adam Reynolds on Mar 7, 2011 2:08 PM EST via mobile reply actions
Sign Barry Bonds out of retirement and make Wimbo designated legs. Bonds will either HR or BB so it works out perfectly.
by Mr. E on Mar 7, 2011 9:08 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
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
