Let's Go Tribe!: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:

Around SBN: Monday Night Heartache, Take Two: Bills fall to Browns Bar-right-arrows

Tribe stacks up in the Outfield

Tiny by fanintexas on

How do you think the our Tribe stacks up in the Outfield with the rest of the AL?
Tribe
RF Blake - CF Sizemore - LF Michaels - 4th Hollandsworth

Yankees
RF Sheffield - CF Damon - LF Matsui - 4th  Williams
Blue Jays
RF Rios - CF Wells - LF Catalanotto -  4th  Johnson
Red Sox
RF Nixon - CF Coco - LF Ramirez - 4th  Stern
Orioles
RF Gibbons - CF Patterson - LF Gomez - 4th  Matos
Devil Rays
RF Huff - CF Baldelli - LF Crawford - 4th  Gomes
White Sox
RF Dye - CF Anderson - LF Podsednik - 4th  Mackowiak
Twins
RF Ford - CF Hunter - LF Stewart - 4th  White
Tigers
RF Ordonez - CF Granderson - LF Monroe - 4th  Young
Royals
RF Sanders - CF DeJesus - LF Brown - 4th  Stairs
Angels
RF Guerrero - CF Erstad - LF Andeson - 4th  Rivera
Athletics
RF Bradley - CF Kotsay - LF Swisher - 4th  Payton
Rangers
RF Mench - CF Wilkerson - LF Dellucci - 4th  Matthews
Mariners
RF Suzuki - CF Reed - LF Ibanez - 4th  Everett

0 recs | Comment 29 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

Re: Tribe stacks up in the Outfield
Are you talking defensively or offensively?

Offensively, it usually isn't a quite fair comparison because different players hit in different spots in the lineup. So if one of those groups had 75+ RBIs over another group, it could be because that other group hits 1, 7, 9, vs the first group hitting 2, 4, 6. Obviously those numbers would be skewed.

That being said, I'd rank our OF middle of the pack offensively (with NY and BOS 1, 2 and maybe ANH 3rd), and slightly above middle of the pack defensively.

by talonk on Feb 9, 2006 3:19 PM EST   0 recs

Re: Tribe stacks up in the Outfield
I think it's totally fair to compare outfields.  The fact that our RF doesn't hit in the middle of the order isn't because he "specializes" in hitting ninth, it's because he more or less sucks.  So I consider that fair game.

Of course, it's fair to say this is probably the least flattering way to look at the Indians roster.  I could do a post that says, "How do you think the Indians stack up in players up the middle?"  From that perspective, we look like the best team in baseball.

Plus, we have the best DH.  Can I count him as "up the middle," since he doesn't play to the left or right?

by Jay on Feb 9, 2006 4:21 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Re: Tribe stacks up in the Outfield
Bye far the worst outfield in the league. You have one superstar Sizemore and two stiffs Blake and Michaels and a your 4th outfielder is a spring time invitee who couldn't even get a major league contract. Ouch

by tribeinne on Feb 9, 2006 3:57 PM EST   0 recs

Re: Tribe stacks up in the Outfield
"By far the worst outfield in the league."  This is what you get when you spend all your time bitching about your own team and don't actually take the time to look at the competition.

Rather than non-analysis, here's some very quick-and-sloppy analysis.  Here are the 15 starting outfielders for the 2006 AL Central, sorted by 2005 OPS:

KC   Sanders 886
CHW  Dye 846
CLE  Sizemore 832
CLE  Michaels 814
DET  Granderson 808
KC   Brown 804
KC   DeJesus 804
DET  Ordonez 795
MIN  Hunter 788
DET  Monroe 768
CLE  Blake 736
MIN  Jones 716
MIN  Stewart 711
CHW  Podsednik 700
CHW  Anderson 559

The surprising result ... offensively, we have the second-best outfield in the division after Kansas City.  Chicago and Minnesota are mired at the bottom (and do we really care about anyone else?).

Again, this analysis is totally unscientific, but I think a more thorough look would come out about the same.  And Cleveland also has the best defensive outfield in the division, possibly in the whole league, although Oakland and Chicago would give us a run for our money on that.

by Jay on Feb 9, 2006 4:14 PM EST   0 recs

Re: Tribe stacks up in the Outfield
Anderson from chicago has not played a whole lot so his ops doesn't carry much weigth and for that matter does Michaels as he was a part time player with half the at bats of most of those people on the list. Other than those two major exceptions I can see your point about the tribes outfield however with that said I am pretty sure that Blake was on of the worst RF in the game last year. He doesn't have much range and his arm is below average for a outfielder let alone a right fielder. The scouting report on Michaels on ESPN says he has good range and a decent arm but he doesn't make some of the plays even when he should. Grady is going to be a star and be the best of all the outfielders on your list but when you have two slightly below average outfielders and a below major league talent 4th outfielder that doesn't fit well.

by tribeinne on Feb 9, 2006 4:28 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Re: Tribe stacks up in the Outfield
I don't see Blake as a liability in the field, but we can agree to disagree on that.  Blake, despite our disgust with his play last year, in reality is not bottom of the barrel, just plain old below-average.

I don't see any reason to be pessimistic about Michaels.  He may not be great, but where is it written down that when a guy goes from 300 at-bats to 500 he suddenly breaks down?  It sure didn't happen to Brian Giles!

Michaels is a dark-horse candidate to be the second-best outfielder in the whole division and is better than even money to be in the top five.  Granted, this mostly reflects how weak the competition is ... but wasn't that the original question in this post?

by Jay on Feb 9, 2006 4:57 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Re: Tribe stacks up in the Outfield
yes it was, We here how bad our outfield is and after reading the scouting reports on the AL, we are not as bad off as I was original thinking.  
Fan in Texas

by fanintexas on Feb 9, 2006 5:02 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Re: Tribe stacks up in the Outfield
need a Edit "hear"
Fan in Texas

by fanintexas on Feb 9, 2006 5:02 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Re: Tribe stacks up in the Outfield
In the central I like us 2nd behind the White Sox and  even with Twins/Tigers

 Over all
1. Yankees   2.  Red Sox  3. Angels  4. Devil Rays  5. White Sox 6.  Indians/Twins/Tigers  

Fan in Texas

by fanintexas on Feb 9, 2006 4:42 PM EST   0 recs

Re: Tribe stacks up in the Outfield
How can we be behind the White Sox?  Anderson may be better than his brief tryout -- funny to see all the anti-Marte folks switch sides on that point -- but he's still a rookie who'll need to adjust and isn't expected to be a big hitter anyway.

The way I see it, at the plate, Sizemore beats Dye, Michaels crushes Podsednik, and realistically Blake and Anderson are a toss-up.  There is no way to look at that White Sox outfield and see a lot of runs scoring.  By the way, PECOTA projects our outfield over theirs by almost four wins, including 40 runs at the plate, which is a lot.

by Jay on Feb 9, 2006 4:52 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Re: Tribe stacks up in the Outfield
Maybe FO is right and Blake is not as bad as we all think?
Fan in Texas

by fanintexas on Feb 9, 2006 4:56 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Re: Tribe stacks up in the Outfield
The way we feel about a player -- and I'm certainly no exception to this -- is based largely on our expectations for him.  After 2004, we expected Blake to be a decent-hitting RF -- you know, decent average and 25-30 HR -- and because he wasn't, we all curse his name all the time.  Oh yeah, the RISP thing isn't helping matters, either.

Meanwhile, Crisp was expected to be ten percent worse than Blake and turned out to be 15 percent better.  So he's our hero.  Dave Roberts is adored by millions in four cities, and he's been a below-average hitter his whole career.  See also:  every shortstop who got a game-winning bloop single.

So Blake is frustrating.  But objectively ... he's merely poor, not horrendous.

by Jay on Feb 9, 2006 5:03 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Re: Tribe stacks up in the Outfield
But Podsednik got more MVP votes than our whole outfield combined!

by mkwng on Feb 9, 2006 5:18 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Re: Tribe stacks up in the Outfield
"But Podsednik got more MVP votes than our whole outfield combined!"

Just goes to show you how idiotic those voters are.  Podsednik was a below average outfielder.  How anyone could have cast a vote for him for anything other than most overrated is beyond me.

by mickeyf on Feb 11, 2006 8:02 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Re: Tribe stacks up in the Outfield
well, I think the OF will be better than the one in KC or Texas

by vaugheyj on Feb 9, 2006 4:58 PM EST   0 recs

Re: Tribe stacks up in the Outfield
If our OF offensively outperforms the ones in K.C. and Texas, we will be unstoppable.

by Chiefroy on Feb 10, 2006 1:40 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

Re: Tribe stacks up in the Outfield
Who would have guessed Emil Brown was the best OF in the AL Central last year?

by APV on Feb 10, 2006 11:22 AM EST   0 recs

Re: Tribe stacks up in the Outfield
Yeah...well you see...what I had meant to say was...uh...never mind.

by APV on Feb 10, 2006 1:50 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Re: Tribe stacks up in the Outfield
I'll add my quick and sloppy analysis.  Here is the average MLVR for the starting OF in the Central, projected by BP for 2006.  MLVR is rate stat, and offense only of course.  The idea is that is the number of runs, per game, that a player adds above an average league hitter.  One reason it's quick and sloppy is there's no adjustment for the distribution of at-bats.

CHI:   0.015
CLE:   0.058
DET:   0.063
KC:    0.026
MN:    0.010

The Central OF with the highest projected MLVR?  Sizemore (0.098).  Number 2?  Michaels (0.091), with a big gap over number 3, Granderson (0.076).

What you see is that each of the outfields is weighed down by one below average hitter, EXCEPT for Detroit.  They're the only team projected with three above average hitters.

One last note: Dubois is projected with a MLVR of 0.054.  If these projections are remotely close, he would be a huge offensive upgrade over Blake.  Huge.

by dgcambridge on Feb 10, 2006 9:32 PM EST   0 recs

Re: Tribe stacks up in the Outfield
And regrettably a huge defensive downgrade.  

by cheech99 on Feb 11, 2006 8:28 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

Re: Tribe stacks up in the Outfield
Huge?  I think Casey does a nice job out there, but it's not like he's a Gold Glover.  Dubois has a plus-arm, that counts for something.  I think with two other rangey defenders out there you have to be willing to sacrifice for a little offensive upside.

One wonders, after the last two seasons, if Dubois isn't just demoralized or shell-shocked.  After the way he's been treated by Dusty and to some extent Wedge as well, I would expect him to get to the plate in the big-leagues terrified of failure.

This guy has just never been given a real shot, and everything in his numbers shows that he could do really well if given the chance.

by Jay on Feb 11, 2006 3:10 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Re: Tribe stacks up in the Outfield
Yes, I'm probably overstating it and yes, you make a great point about his presence being more reasonable alongside two rangy outfielders.  

I'm not sure what else Wedge was supposed to do with him last year though.  I'm going off memory here, but didn't he get all of the "Hafner DL hit-in-the-face at bats" and then few thereafter?  Yes, Blake sucked, but I think (at the time, talking late July) could have been expected to rebound and Dubois wasn't exactly showing signs of tearing it up in his limited time.  Again, you may have the quantitative stuff to back it up, but I think Wedge handling Dubois better is mostly a "hindsight is 20/20" kind of thing.

Here's a thought, probably a bad one.  Assuming no other deals are made, what's preventing us from at least starting the season with a six-man bullpen and adding Dubois to the 25 man?  

Last year, when we were ripping off a 37-12 mark from early Aug to late Sept, we were working with about a 5-man plus bullpen:  Wickman, Howry, Betancourt, Cabrera, Sauerbeck to a left handed hitter every other game, and Riske in non-critical situations.  

With 3 off days in the first 2 weeks guarding against burning out the pen, I think you have a clear advantage to play righty/lefty in the late innings with Hollandsworth/Dubois or Hollandsworth/Blake that is probably worth more to the team than a 7th man in the pen.  

Of course, no long man and the first extended extra innings game you may have to make a roster move, but my feeling is:

A:  If you're dissatisfied with the outfield mix, throw another bat in there to at least play the match-up game in the late innings.  

B:  Dubois isn't going to do anything in Triple A that's going to change our opinion of him one way or another.  

C:  He hits left-handers a lot better than Blake or Hollandsworth (right?)

C:  Clears up Francisco, Gutz, and Snyder to play every day there.  

by cheech99 on Feb 11, 2006 9:02 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Re: Tribe stacks up in the Outfield
"Yes, Blake sucked, but I think (at the time, talking late July) could have been expected to rebound and Dubois wasn't exactly showing signs of tearing it up in his limited time."

Here I gotta nitpick.  We got Dubois with a full eleven weeks left in the season, and the dude got all of 50 plate appearances.  In fact, he's got all of 227 big-league plate appearances for his whole career -- so he hasn't had the slightest chance to be exposed to major-league pitching and adjust to it, while at the same time he's clearly got nothing left to learn in the minors.

My point is that (a) he could well be a very good major league hitter, (b) he needs time to adjust and (c) the Indians already knew all of this when they acquired him.  So if they were expecting some big Blake bounce-back, you have to ask, what were they thinking acquiring Dubois?  Were they just getting some cheap insurance on the risk that an angry fan breaks Blake's legs?

On top of which ... I don't think they expected the big Blake bounce-back.  His 2005 numbers were not that different from his 2003 numbers ... so you have to wonder which year was really the aberration.  Shapiro has said that they expected numbers somewhere in between his 2003 and 2004 seasons, which means of course they were disappointed.

by Jay on Feb 11, 2006 10:43 PM EST   0 recs

Re: Tribe stacks up in the Outfield
Why were they thinking about acquiring Dubois?  

They knew Gerut had tapped out and was nothing more than a 4th outfielder who could be stretched to play center.  They leveraged the Cubs dubious 2005 contending premise, which required a serviceable CF, and got back a player further from arbitration, with greater power, greater upside, and less likeliness to give management headaches.  And of course, hits right handed.

I think you agree with all that; your point is why not give him a meaningful trial period instead of 50 PA's.  Fine, I guess.  

My point is, we traded our 4th outfielder for him; should we reasonably have thought he could immediately become our 3rd outfielder and at mid-July, there was still some doubt that Blake's 2004 was a complete outlier.  No one knew at that point that Blake would end up 3 for 56 or whatever is was with RISP.  

As you said, for the most part this all semantics/nitpicking.  Why we never seem to know what to do with the Ludwicks/Phelps/Dubois comparative set, I don't know.  But again, I agree with you.  Barring any more moves, why not start the season with a 6-man pen, Dubois is your starter at one corner against all left-handers.  

One helluva bench with Shoppach, Hollandsworth, Blake/Dubois, Perez, and Vazquez.  

by cheech99 on Feb 12, 2006 9:35 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

Re: Tribe stacks up in the Outfield
I don't see how anyone can be a backup when all they've ever gotten is 50 PA, and that's my complaint.  It's not that I think we should have gotten a better haul for Gerut.  If Dubois isn't going to get a chance to start, I'd have rather we picked up a better match for being a backup player.

by Jay on Feb 12, 2006 11:33 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

Re: Tribe stacks up in the Outfield
I also wonder about the trade for Dubois, that's why I keep bringing him up.  Gerut does seem like the prototypical 4th OF, but that has some value.  Dubois' skill set does fit that profile.  He is clearly higher upside/higher risk.  So I agree: what's the point if we're not going to give him a real chance?  I can't believe Shapiro has seen anything that would have surprised him about Dubois.

It is interesting to hear your take on the trade.  I thought of Gerut as having more value then that at the time.  Mr. Glass, though.

If the thinking was that Gerut was "tapped out", maybe this was more of a my-stalled-player-for-your-stalled-player type of trade.  Like Smith for Gautreau, but at a higher level.

by dgcambridge on Feb 12, 2006 11:36 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

Re: Tribe stacks up in the Outfield
I think Gerut is the prototypical fourth outfielder, but we didn't (and don't) have a typical outfield.  We send two CF out there, which means our backup doesn't have to be able to play CF, and he does need to provide a little extra platoon sock at the plate.

Lots to like about Gerut.  The only stuff not to like was, (a) injury-prone, (b) probably never going to hit 15 HR again, (c) budding clubhouse lawyer.  Take away any one of those, and my bet is that we'd still have him.  Not that it matters a hell of a lot.

by Jay on Feb 12, 2006 11:50 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed

Search

User Tools

Constantly updated Indians news, lots of in-depth analysis, live in-game discussions -- and more fanatical and thoughtful Indians fans than every other web site combined.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Topps1978-332f_small
Just how important is the draft?

by talonk 3 days ago

12 comments | 6 recs

Yw9dg4yi_small
Open Cliff Lee Just Won the Cy Young Award Thread

by nickjs21 5 days ago

161 comments | 6 recs

Recent FanPosts

Small
Free Agent Starters

by stickpiano 5 days ago

73 comments | 0 recs

3444ant_black_small
Depth Starters

by APV 10 days ago

39 comments | 2 recs

Brick_small
40-Man Decisions - Who ya Got?

by Brick. 12 days ago

104 comments | 0 recs

Small
Indians fans interested in Closer & 3rd Baseman?

by Rhombus67 14 days ago

109 comments | 0 recs

47b8dd28b3127cceb64839d9746800000026102bauwjrq3za_small
It Must Be The Offseason.

by afh4 14 days ago

18 comments | 10 recs

Small
A Pronk Sighting

by Chuck H 15 days ago

141 comments | 0 recs

3444ant_black_small
Short-Term Depth: Infield

by APV 16 days ago

86 comments | 1 recs

3444ant_black_small
Short-term Depth: Outfield

by APV 20 days ago

94 comments | 1 recs

Post_icon New FanPost All FanPosts Carrot-mini

Recent Posts

AL CENTRAL AFTER JULY 9

W L PCT GB
Cleveland 44 28 .611 -
Minnesota 38 34 .528 6
Kansas City 35 35 .500 8
Chicago 36 36 .500 8
Detroit 28 44 .389 16

An Empty Widget

No Data Available

FanShots

Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.

Recommended FanShots

BBWAA awards AL MVP to Travelocity Gnome

by nickjs21 about 10 hours ago 55 comments | 6 recs

O/T: Christmas Ale has arrived! Christmas Ale has arrived!

by hans 10 days ago 133 comments | 8 recs

Recent FanShots

O/T "A valuable substitute for vegetables"

by APV about 1 hour ago 2 comments | 0 recs

Tazawa Junichi

by nickjs21 about 7 hours ago 3 comments | 0 recs

Cliff Lee gets the Dugout Treatment

by Turkmenbashi about 10 hours ago 15 comments | 0 recs

2009 Marcels

by APV 1 day ago 8 comments | 0 recs

BBWAA do not screw up NL MVP, give it to Pujols

by nickjs21 1 day ago 16 comments | 0 recs

OMGICBWGHAFN - Matt Whitney

by Brick. 1 day ago 18 comments | 0 recs

Lugo for Robertson or Willis?

by afh4 2 days ago 12 comments | 0 recs

Indians pursuing Hoffman, other closers

by hans 3 days ago 68 comments | 0 recs

Yanks make CC an offer; can he refuse?

by peter m 4 days ago 77 comments | 0 recs

Post_icon New FanShot All FanShots Carrot-mini

Site Meter