Andy Marte Redux??
Paul Hoynes had this to say in today's Plain Dealer regarding Andy Marte:
"Clubhouse confidential: There might be some disagreement among the Tribe's deep thinkers about whether third baseman Andy Marte should rejoin the big-league club in the near future. Manager Eric Wedge has said repeatedly that he wants Marte as soon as he's recovered from a strained left hamstring and back in playing shape.Marte was hitting just .143 (3-for- 21) with one homer and two RBI in seven games at Buffalo. If Marte isn't recalled, the Indians could activate him and option him to Buffalo."
**
Assuming Marte does return to Cleveland in the near future, such return would likely cause a chain reaction in the lineup affecting no less than three or four positions (3B, 1B, potentially even both corner outfield positions).
That said, I'd be curious to hear everyone's thoughts on Marte, et al. Should Marte return to Cleveland as soon as he is injury-free (and presumably, play the majority of time at 3B)? Should he remain in Buffalo? If he should return to Cleveland, how is the rest of the lineup likely to be affected? Is such a lineup shakeup a good thing?
My thoughts on this are quite mixed at the moment - so I would be very interested to hear what others are thinking about this. It might make for a good/timely topic that everyone might want to weigh in on . . . especially on an "Off Day."
0 recs |
43 comments
Comments
Re: Andy Marte Redux??
This isn't like the Cabrera injury last year where his time in Buffalo was limited to the rehab stint - the Indians have an option year on Marte. The Indians can keep him there the rest of the year if they had to.
But if he comes back, he takes PT over someone, probably Ryan Garko. Casey Blake would be best utilized as an outfielder, but that's not happening if Nixon and Dellucci remain healthy.
by Ryan on May 14, 2007 12:53 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Re: Andy Marte Redux??
It seems as though Blake has a stabilizing influence on this infield when he plays 3B. I too, don't think Blake is being optimized when he plays 1B - especially given Garko's very decent performance at 1B thus far. And, although I know I sound like a badly broken record, this offense seems to be better off (and is likely to improve even more) with Garko getting consistent ABs in the middle of it.
Even given the small sample size that is Marte's 2007 season to date, the above has me leaning a bit towards additional seasoning in Buffalo for Marte, but I am torn.
As for Blake in the outfield - if the Delucci/Michaels platoon continues to underperform, any chance we shore up the outfield defense moving Trot to left?? with Blake in right? I'm not necessarily advocating such a move as much as I'm thinking aloud how to best use the pieces we have to optimize this lineup - both in the field and at the plate.
by mplswahoo on May 14, 2007 1:09 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Re: Andy Marte Redux??
by Joe. on May 14, 2007 1:21 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Re: Andy Marte Redux??
That said, I feel like Garko's offense contributes more to the team at this point than anything gained by Marte's defense, so in that sense, I really wouldn't be sad to see Marte stay in Buffalo.
by Turkmenbashi on May 14, 2007 10:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Andy Marte Redux??
by E5 on May 16, 2007 5:18 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Andy Marte Redux??
by Turkmenbashi on May 16, 2007 6:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Andy Marte Redux??
by E5 on May 16, 2007 6:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Andy Marte Redux??
by Turkmenbashi on May 16, 2007 7:20 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Andy Marte Redux??
This is all a vast overreaction.
Marte is not BP. BP got 370 AB that season and responded with a 553 OPS -- a 50 OPS+.
Marte got his first regular playing time in the big leagues last season. In only 164 AB, he responded with a 708 OPS -- 83 OPS+ -- and a fine showing defensively. Not anything to write home about, but just fine for a 22-year-old rookie.
Now you guys are ready to throw him under a bus, all because of -- wait for it 39 AB -- in which he had a 553 OPS.
39! Seriously, go smack yourselves in the face!
When and if Marte sustains that crappy 553 OPS over ten times the playing time, 370 rather than 39, then we can haul out the Brandon Phillips comparisons. Until and unless that happens, all we're seeing here is a rookie, who's known for starting slow, off to a slow start as per usual.
By the way, Grady Sizemore, on that last road trip? 41 AB, 533 OPS. Hafner? 33 AB, 524 OPS.
Defensive slumps rarely last very long. I won't claim that having him back in Cleveland is definitely the best thing for the team. But he hasn't done anything that should make anyone doubt that when he gets to be a starter for four months as BP did, he's going to establish himself.
by Jay on May 16, 2007 8:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Andy Marte Redux??
He seems unlikely to produce as much offensively as the player he would push out of the lineup (Garko, Delucci, Nixon).
by kov on May 14, 2007 1:24 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Re: Andy Marte Redux??
That said, I don't want to crush Marte's confidence and have him wallowing in Buffalo such that his head is not in the right place. Perhaps this concern can be remedied by some well-placed conversations from the FO with Marte. It's really a tough call, however.
by mplswahoo on May 14, 2007 1:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Andy Marte Redux??
I no longer know how I feel about him.
by Gradyforpresident on May 14, 2007 1:59 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Re: Andy Marte Redux??
*Marte recovering a little bit of the hitting stroke at AAA
*Blake trying to stay surprisingly league average at third base defensively
*Blake hitting enough to say at third base
*We stay at or near the top of the division or the wild card while all this is going on.
If we tread water on say at least two of the four, then they'll just let things sort of work themselves out; Marte just down in AAA longer than we thought this year.
If 3 of the 4 aren't playing out, than I think we might try to pursue somebody like Mark Teahan. Unrealistic, perhaps, but it probably makes more sense than making cosmetic bullpen changes.
by cheech99 on May 14, 2007 2:13 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Re: Andy Marte Redux??
I'll be interested to see if he stays in Buffalo and sulks, like Garko did, if he gets the same free pass. Marte's 2005 was very comparable to Garko's and Marte was much younger.
The thing about the quote that surprises me is that Wedge is so pro-Garko, which obviously runs against the (overstated) Wedge-Blake connection. It also implies that it's perhaps Shapiro who wants Marte down. It's hard to read much of anything into it, though-it's not as if stashing Marte in AAA is giving up on him.
by afh4 on May 14, 2007 2:38 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Re: Andy Marte Redux??
by dgcambridge on May 14, 2007 8:16 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Andy Marte Redux??
by afh4 on May 14, 2007 8:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Andy Marte Redux??
He was having trouble when he left, do you think the time off will do him good with the big club?
I say leave Marte in AAA until he earns his way back up.
Another thought...Coco is hitting .221. If he was raking, wouldn't there be more pressure to get Marte up and going in the bigs?
by BoDiaz1974 on May 14, 2007 2:53 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Re: Andy Marte Redux??
by Jeffrey R on May 14, 2007 3:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Andy Marte Redux??
by oxforddave on May 14, 2007 4:02 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Re: Andy Marte Redux??
Again, I don't have clear answers (as again, from the Hoynes piece, the FO may not either) - I just think this is an intriguing dilemma.
by mplswahoo on May 14, 2007 4:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Andy Marte Redux??
Either way, I want Marte close to Derek Shelton. So I say keep him up.
by nickjs21 on May 14, 2007 4:33 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Re: Andy Marte Redux??
by APV on May 14, 2007 4:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Andy Marte Redux??
by mplswahoo on May 14, 2007 4:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm guessing he'd split time with Garko now!
Like I said before, Garko has been pretty solid at 1B for the most part (his biggest problem in my opinion is not knowing when he should go after a ball between 1B and 2B and when he should stay at 1B, something that I think he'd get better at with more playing experience, but his catching balls and picking balls out of the dirt over at 1B has been pretty solid for the most part.)
Therefore, I think Blake wouldn't play at 1B every time there is a RH on the mound, since Garko has shown he can hit RH pitching also.
In fact, looking up their stats, maybe Blake should start at 1B against LHP and Garko should start at 1B against RHP (presuming Marte plays 3B again, something I don't think should happen right now for reasons I stated elsewhere):
From ESPN.com MLB Player Index:
Blake:
vs. LHP = .300 (9-30; 7 BB/4 K)
vs. RHP = .228 (21-92; 11 BB/28 K)
Garko:
vs. LHP = .278 (10-36; 1 BB/9 K)
vs. RHP = .323 (21-65; 4 BB/8 K)
Just my 2 cents. :-)
by indiansfan on May 14, 2007 6:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Re: I'm guessing he'd split time with Garko now!
I understand your point. Obviously, however, both Blake and Garko's numbers against lefties fall victim to small sample size.
That said, I suppose my preference would be to play Garko most days, in spite of the numbers you presented - with a view towards the future (i.e. for many of the same developmental reasons that weigh in favor of playing Marte at third) but also with an eye on fielding the most competitive team at the present.
It really is a tough spot though - and fun to speculate on an "off day." However, barring an injury that makes this entire discussion moot, I suspect that the decision that the Tribe's deep thinkers ultimately make on this one will have a significant impact on how the seasons unfolds - let's just hope it's for the better.
by mplswahoo on May 14, 2007 7:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree that playing Blake solely against LHP
by indiansfan on May 14, 2007 7:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Andy Marte Redux??
While we've heard he's quiet, reticient, whatever, we ultimately have no idea what his psychological profile is like. Shapiro & Co. do and I think that's a huge factor that we really can't hope to speculate succesfully on.
by afh4 on May 14, 2007 4:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Andy Marte Redux??
by mauichuck on May 14, 2007 6:16 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Andy Marte Redux??
I don't think Marte will be traumatized by not coming up immediately. Blake is no threat to take over his job and I'm pretty certain Marte will be our 3B by fall. It's just a matter of time before Nixon or someone will go DL, then we can bring up Marte.
by LeftyCatcher on May 14, 2007 5:30 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Re: Andy Marte Redux??
I think this is the perfect opportunity to help groom our 3rd baseman of the future. I think it would be a mistake to keep him in AAA. We've got the options to give him a day or two off each week, as people mentioned above. I'd rather have him get adjusted now than later in the fall when we might be in a close race and there's more pressure for him to be hitting.
by Nat on May 14, 2007 5:37 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I think Marte should work on things down at AAA!
It is a difficult situation, but as some have already mentioned, Marte wasn't hitting all that well up here and really isn't hitting that well down there either. I'd say to let him figure out some things down there, start producing again, let him get some confidence back, then reevaluate at that point. By then, something else may have happened regarding 3B, 1B, the OF, etc.
Garko has been pretty solid at 1B and currently, he's one of the hottest bats in the Indians' lineup; I don't see how you can remove him. Blake has also been pretty solid at 3B and is also one of our hotter bats. That's another reason why I think it's better to leave Marte down at AAA Buffalo - this offense still isn't clicking like it should; you can't afford to add an almost automatic out to the lineup right now, not with Grady and Pronk struggling as they are and Victor and Trot going on "down" cycles.
And, despite Marte's high status as a prospect, he hasn't shown the ability to hit consistently at the ML level yet - I don't see how the offense will improve by adding him to the lineup right now; his hitting a HR once every week or two, along with the occasional double, isn't likely going to help this offense out enough to justify bringing him up now, especially if we want to stay in contention.
I'd rather consider using someone like Gutierrez/Michaels/Choo/Francisco and platoon them with Nixon and/or Dellucci in the OF, rather than have Blake rejoin the OF and bring Marte up now.
Just my 2 cents. :-)
by indiansfan on May 14, 2007 6:14 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Re: Andy Marte Redux??
I'm all for leaving Marte down in Buffalo for as long as he can legally on a rehab assignment if it helps him fix his swing, but any time longer than that becomes counterproductive.
by woodsmeister on May 14, 2007 7:04 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Re: Andy Marte Redux??
Likewise, Blake is a guy who can have a great couple of weeks around the bag, but Marte is a guy who can have a great year there. With Marte back, you're going to see Marte, Blake and Garko all in there against LHP, and two of the three in against RHP. I think there are plenty of AB's to go around.
by Jay on May 14, 2007 11:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'd prefer to not fix something that isn't broken!
I can understand your point about Marte, but right now, Blake and Garko have solidified the IF defense and both are hitting well, so I really see no reason to bring up Marte anytime soon unless Marte really demonstrates that he is crushing AAA pitching (moreso than .143 (3-21)) and/or Blake and/or Garko falter offensively and/or defensively.
I don't think we can really say that Marte would be an improvement offensively over what those two are giving us, and defensively, Blake has probably been as good as Marte was, as Marte had some early season struggles. Combine that with the fact we've got Grady and Pronk struggling and Victor and Trot on current downslides, I just don't think the Indians can afford to have two guys down at the bottom of the order trying to figure out the MLs at this time (Barfield being the other, and he has made progress, but is still inconsistent with good days like Saturday -2 3Bs - and bad days like Sunday - chasing bad pitches out of the zone.)
Therefore, if Marte has to remain down there longer than his rehab to really force his way back up here, I have no problem with that, and in the long run, it might enable Marte to better hit ML pitching, since he never really hit for a high AVG at AAA in the first place - he can now work on that more definitively at AAA so that he can be more consistent when he gets back up here, at least enough to hit .250 or better here.
You would hope Marte could do that once he gets established up here, but at the rate he was going and at the rate he seems to be going right now at AAA, .250 seems like a longshot to me - Barfield isn't close to .250 even now after his over .300 AVG of late, and he had more ML experience to draw on, so leaving Marte down at AAA for an extended period to work on some things wouldn't be the worst thing to happen to him in my opinion.
Just my 2 cents. :-)
by indiansfan on May 14, 2007 7:41 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Re: Andy Marte Redux??
by APV on May 14, 2007 8:41 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Re: Andy Marte Redux??
by Nat on May 14, 2007 8:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's good to hear! Keep it going Andy!
by indiansfan on May 14, 2007 8:48 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Re: Andy Marte Redux??
by Joe. on May 14, 2007 9:28 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Re: Andy Marte Redux??
by Ryan on May 14, 2007 11:11 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Re: Andy Marte Redux??
by hans on May 14, 2007 11:38 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Seems unusual that he and Shapiro are
by indiansfan on May 15, 2007 1:04 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

by 
















