Marte
This excerpt from Paul Hoynes of the PD.
Marte is out of options after this season. The Indians must keep him in the big leagues next year, trade him or risk losing him on waivers.
Scouts who have seen Marte with Class AAA Buffalo say he looks bored and isn't showing good bat speed. Marte opened this season as the Indians' starting third baseman.
"It's not something I'm prepared to talk about right now," said Tribe manager Eric Wedge, referring to projected infield moves. "We have some decisions to make this winter."
0 recs |
175 comments
Comments
Re: Marte
by stuart dean on
Aug 19, 2007 7:55 AM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
by fleerdon on
Aug 19, 2007 9:02 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
It's entire possible that Marte-Peralta-Cabrera would be the best configuration, both offensively and defensively.
by Jay on
Aug 19, 2007 11:00 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
by JulioBernazard on
Aug 19, 2007 12:24 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
by Jay on
Aug 19, 2007 12:43 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
by JulioBernazard on
Aug 19, 2007 12:48 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
by stuart dean on
Aug 19, 2007 10:43 AM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
Now does Marte have any reason to be moping around? Hell no, he had an opportunity up here to shine and he stunk up the joint.
But for anyone who saw Marte during spring training down in Winter Haven, he looked liked the cockiest SOB around. Smiling after errors, terrible plate discipline, no effort during warmups...he was a man who had been annointed as our starting third baseman, and he certainly acted like it.
I think everyone shares some blame in this. Our organization for promoting a guy who hadn't proven himself. And Marte for developing too big an ego too soon.
I would've hoped that at some point this year, either Shap or someone would've gone down to Buffalo and had a heart-to-heart with Marte (plus interpreter if needed). Explaining that they understand why he's been dogging it, how they're partly to blame as well, and that if he gives 110% from here on out they'd be willing to give him some playing time come September.
Since Marte has become the black sheep of the organization, my guess is that never transpired. It'll be a shame if this situation doesn't work itself out.
by supermarioelia on
Aug 19, 2007 12:02 PM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
by mauichuck on
Aug 19, 2007 12:08 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
by supermarioelia on
Aug 19, 2007 1:26 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
I'm only speaking from anecdotal evidence, but the Indians organization seems to be very hands-on with their players in the sense that I would be surprised if someone hadn't approached Marte in the way you suggest.
I must and do take your word for it in regards to Marte's ego. I saw him once at a signing and to the passerby's eye he seemed very shy and overwhelmed with the crowd that showed up. Perhaps this played a hand in the ego he developed. I hope a simple humbling is all he needs, although his "bored" play at Buffalo suggests the contrary (that it's had a negative effect).
by nickjs21 on
Aug 19, 2007 12:21 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
Marte has had almost 3000 plate appearances in the minors, most of it outstanding. He's coming up on 1200 plate appearances in Triple-A alone. He certainly has been given every expectation that he was "about to be" a major leaguer for two years running now.
So I don't really blame him for being bored. How would you feel if you proved ready for promotion and then waited around for two years? It's not like he's someone like Brad Snyder, who's never really done well at Triple-A. He checked that task off two year ago.
Hell, if Ryan Goleski can complain about not being in the majors, certainly Andy Marte can.
by Jay on
Aug 19, 2007 1:32 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
Baseball, like all sports, is about how you're performing now not last year or the year before.
If Marte truly wants to play in the big leagues he better start hitting like a big league player now. Right now he's, at best, a AAAA'er.
by mauichuck on
Aug 19, 2007 1:42 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
Garko a year ago: .247 .352 .420
Garko was also two years older and a bad first baseman -- and didn't have Marte's track record as a hitter. Marte is, by his manager's assessment, an excellent third baseman.
So what you're claiming here was simply not the case where Garko was concerned. Go ahead and acknowledge that, and we can move on.
by Jay on
Aug 19, 2007 1:45 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
The Garko thing is way outside of two standard deviations. That is the probability of a AAA .250 hitter hitting over .300 in the majors is highly unlikely - much less than 1% - but it happens. It's just not the way to bet.
To expect Marte to perform well outside the norm would be very risky.
by mauichuck on
Aug 19, 2007 1:51 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
by GermanysTribeFan on
Aug 19, 2007 2:03 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
I won't compare him to Garko, who was considered one of the top makeup guys around, period, but Marte has not been lacking in this category.
by Jay on
Aug 19, 2007 2:29 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
I disagree, and I think you need to acknowledge the reverse. Garko hit >.300 every stop in the minors before his substandard AAA performance. Marte hasn't topped .280 ever. Garko came in with the better track record. It is not like Marte struggling for half a season like Garko did. Marte has struggled for 2 full seasons now.
Average isn't everything, but it is important.
by oxforddave on
Aug 19, 2007 2:12 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
Since both of those statements are totally, totally false, we know that Marte had a much, much more impressive track record as a hitter than Garko.
by Jay on
Aug 19, 2007 2:16 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
Right now he doesn't look like he's ready for the major leagues. And as you well know next year is make or break. I don't see the sense of urgency on Mare's part that I'd like to see before he gets promoted.
by mauichuck on
Aug 19, 2007 2:20 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
by supermarioelia on
Aug 19, 2007 2:23 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
by CarnegieAndOntario on
Aug 19, 2007 2:25 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
by Jay on
Aug 19, 2007 2:26 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
by CarnegieAndOntario on
Aug 19, 2007 2:29 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
All I'm saying is this: it's unreasonable to expect a average AAA hitter be an average ML hitter the next year. That's all.
by mauichuck on
Aug 19, 2007 2:29 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
by Jay on
Aug 19, 2007 2:30 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
That said, if your premise is that Marte is every bit as deserving of irrational favoritism as Garko and that the fact that there's an undercurrent set against him suggests ... something awry ... then I'm inclined to agree. Casey Blake has had a good year, but he's no long-term solution at third. We should be Marte's biggest backers. What explains that?
Subtle racism would be the cynical answer. Ryan Garko is white, personable, intelligent, a Stanford grad, well-spoken, built like a refrigerator, and had the whole ex-catcher thing going on. Andy Marte is a not-that-talkative Latino and also he's a tremendous athlete who's struggling at his natural position. No matter how much creedence you give to the racism, there's definitely a sense that Garko succeeded DESPITE the odds being against him, whereas Marte is failing even though the odds seem to be in his favor.
Which is all hogwash, of course. Garko is also a superior athlete, albeit a different sort of athleticism than Marte's. Andy Marte may be an eminently likeable personage -- how the hell would I know? And it's thoroughly unfair to expect Marte to be a productive major leaguer yet. We're essentially blaming him for being part of the 99.99% of major leaguers who aren't Miguel Cabrera. But you asked.
by fleerdon on
Aug 19, 2007 3:40 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
I don't know where you get that Garko is the better athlete.
I think the real answer is that even though you'd think most readers here are savvy to (1) batting average, (2) sample size, (3) age/level effects, (4) peripherals, we're still seeing fundamental attribution error here. If a guy does a bad job at age 21, in a handful of AB's, even sophisticated fans have trouble believing in the strong fundamentals of years of minor league data. And on the other side, if a guy has a good batting average and racks up some RBI for a few weeks, it's undying love for years and years -- even if he's older and the peripherals are not great.
Basically, people still allow their gut instincts to be informed by the Idiot Stats, rather than by their brains.
by Jay on
Aug 19, 2007 5:08 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
Picking Phil Hughes as a great player is easy - all of the scouterazzi (love that BTW) had him as a potential AS. But nobody - nobody - had Mike Piazza as a future AS. That's where a GM makes his money - finding that gem that everybody overlooked.
By the same token a great GM knows when a guy's future is less than his numbers predict.
So latching onto a guy like Marte is a no-brainer - everybody had him as a future AS. It's knowing when they're wrong is the trick.
by mauichuck on
Aug 19, 2007 5:16 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
Including the team that drafted him in the 63rd round, purely as a favor to a family friend. (Not the best example perhaps.)
by Jay on
Aug 19, 2007 5:26 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
But scouts who have great instincts and can spot the gems from the posers are worth their weight in gold.
And yeah - Tommy knew all along that Mike was the real deal. Just ask him.
by mauichuck on
Aug 19, 2007 5:34 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
I don't hear "lackadaisical" attached to many white players in general. I wonder if there's just a cultural rift there. Maybe Latino kids' dads don't chew them out after the game for not running out an infield pop-up. Grimacing after an error is a learned behavior, too; what if Dominican kids razz each other for taking mistakes too seriously as opposed to not seriously enough? I'm just throwing crap out there, but my deeper point is the same as yours: We could, if we chose, perceive the identical fact pattern quite differently.
by fleerdon on
Aug 19, 2007 5:35 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
I don't hear "lackadaisical" attached to many white players in general.
We don't have a lot of non-white managers or GM's -- or coaches.
Reversing the perspective a bit, I think you could say that white players have a peculiar ingrained desire to impress each other by showing how upset they are over a mistake, running hard for no reason whatsoever (like out to the field) just to show how hard they run all the time.
Certain behaviors and body language will have one meaning within one cultural group, and another meaning -- or no meaning -- in another group. Garko's performance cannot be distinguished meaningfully from Marte's, but their behaviors are perceived differently.
I think this goes in both directions, too. I think Wedge is impressed by certain players' behaviors that aren't really indicative of anything, other than it's what he likes to see. How else to explain the way he regards Blake and Mastny, among others?
by Jay on
Aug 19, 2007 6:10 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
Marte Garko
age BA OPS level BA OPS level
18 .281 .831 A N/A
19 .285 .841 A+ N/A
20 .269 .889 AA .368 1.010 Stanford
21 .275 .878 AAA .314 .995 Stanford
22 .261 .773 AAA .402 1.185 Stanford
23 .252 .719 AAA .330 .950 A+/AA
24 N/A .303 .882 AAA
25 N/A .247 .772 AAA
ML .199 .614 .302 .861
The ML are major league career starts.
At what age did Marte have a higher OPS? Who looks like they had one blip in their record, and who looks like a sustained downturn?
I grant that Marte's 19-21 stats are quite impressive. But do we punish Garko for going to college (Stanford nonetheless)? It's not like he was struggling.
Furthermore, BA does matter. Marte's problem is that he cannot square up the ball from his long swing.
I'll say it again, I find the Marte excuses to be similar to the Crowe excuses of indiansfan.
by oxforddave on
Aug 19, 2007 10:39 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
I have no idea how to compare college stats with minor league stats for a given age, so I don't know what to do with those numbers other than ignore them for the moment.
by jds16 on
Aug 19, 2007 11:37 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
Even a top college program is facing competition that is Low-A caliber at best.
by Jay on
Aug 19, 2007 11:55 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
You can ignore the college stats if you want to, even though they were equal or better than recent major conference college players like Tulowitzki, Zimmerman, Beau Mills (while at Fresno St.).
Maybe we should ignore the major league stats also. Maybe we should ignore everything but Marte's 20 and 21-yr old seasons and keep dreaming.
by oxforddave on
Aug 20, 2007 10:03 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
Just for fun, let's go ahead and look at those major league stats. He's been called up six times -- three times in 2005, once in 2006, and twice this season (start of the season and off the DL). How has he started off each callup?
June 2005 -- 1 for 14
July 2009 -- 0 for 9
Sept 2005 -- 1 for 13
July 2006 -- 1 for 13
April 2007 -- 1 for 13
May 2007 -- 2 for 11
Lord knows this is nothing to be proud of, but again, this is just confirming what we always knew about the guy. Whatever his strengths, he's not going to hit the ground running. Take it for granted.
What about a little further out?
June 2005 -- 500 OPS, 52 PA
July 2006 -- 346 OPS, 45 PA
April 2007 -- 553 OPS, 41 PA
Again, slow starter, nothing to be proud of. But what happpens after he gets 45 PA?
August 2006 -- 828 OPS, 133 PA
That was the one time in Marte's career that he's been given the chance to get past those first 45-or-so PA in the majors. I don't know if this proves a damned thing -- and if it does, if it's something good about Marte. I only know that it makes me want to see what he can do given some time to settle in.
by Jay on
Aug 21, 2007 1:49 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I don't follow the comparison!
Are you referring to the OF/2B excuses I speculated for Crowe last year as a possibility for his difficulties? I'm not sure I see how the excuses for Marte and the excuses for Crowe to be that similar - they are two different kinds of prospects on two totally different paths - Marte's prospect status continues to take a hit due to his lackluster performance at AAA, while Crowe's status has taken a hit, but is beginning to rebound a bit thanks to his play over the last two months, similar to what he was doing at High-A. Plus, Marte was highly-touted as an International signing into the Atlanta system; Crowe was highly touted coming out of the Univ. of Arizona.
I don't see where the two are that similar, and as a result, I don't see where the excuses for them are that similar either. Please elaborate - thanks!
by indiansfan on
Aug 20, 2007 1:27 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: I don't follow the comparison!
by Jay on
Aug 20, 2007 1:34 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: I don't follow the comparison!
by Brick. on
Aug 20, 2007 1:38 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: I don't follow the comparison!
by Jay on
Aug 20, 2007 1:43 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Another notable difference, which is all the
Plus, Garko didn't allow the ML opportunity to slip through his fingers, either in 2006 or in 2007, whereas Marte did this year.
Just my 2 cents. :-)
by indiansfan on
Aug 20, 2007 8:00 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Another notable difference, which is all the
by oxforddave on
Aug 20, 2007 10:06 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
That makes sense now - thanks!
Now I get it - LOL! :-)
Heck, even I can't support the Crowe in CF vs. LF/RF theory now, not after he was in CF all of the first half and did next-to-nothing offensively, then when ahead and is hitting more like he did in High-A in the second half, mostly playing CF, though I think he had a few appearances in the corner positions as well.
At the time, I was just trying to see if there was some correlation, but obviously now, there wasn't.
As for Marte, I sure hope this theory about that he's moreless just bored and/or pressing to try to get back to the MLs and can do similarly to what Garko did when he finally got a chance holds true, but like I said, Garko didn't let the opportunity slip through his fingers either time in 2006 or 2007, whereas Marte did this season after he was named the starting 3B.
Now, I don't think he shouldn't get another chance, but if he doesn't start showing signs of being more consistent and using the whole field more regularly the next time he's up here, then I have to start thinking he won't be a long-term piece of the puzzle, especially with the progression guys like Wes Hodges, Jared Goedert, and Beau Mills are making this year.
Just my 2 cents. :-)
by indiansfan on
Aug 21, 2007 11:42 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
This is revisionist, bordering on idiotic.
Marte had all of 41 plate appearances, 13 starts at 3B, before he went down with an injury. In what universe do you condemn a 23-year-old rookie after a rough couple of weeks? He has not had an opportunity. He's had less opportunity than Garko had at the same point, less than Barfield, less than BP, less than Ben f-ing Broussard.
Marte was sent down because of Blake's performance, not his own. Of course his performance in Buffalo is disappointing, but how is it any different from Garko in 2006? I mean, other than the fact that Garko had less of a track record and less defensive value and was two years older?
This talk about "black sheep" and "ego" is for the drama queens.
by Jay on
Aug 19, 2007 12:53 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
I have no idea what you're arguing here. That you think Marte should be given another chance at the major league level now? That you feel bad for the guy and understand his situation?
by supermarioelia on
Aug 19, 2007 1:25 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
Hell no, he had an opportunity up here to shine and he stunk up the joint.
I'm arguing that that is a load of crap.
by Jay on
Aug 19, 2007 1:27 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
by supermarioelia on
Aug 19, 2007 1:30 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
So you're now parsing words to the point where your original comment doesn't mean anything.
I don't think he has reason to be mad at anyone, but I do think, after what he has already achieved in the minors, that 41 plate appearances is not an "opportunity" to be thankful for.
by Jay on
Aug 19, 2007 1:35 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
That's enough meta for me for one day.
by supermarioelia on
Aug 19, 2007 1:44 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
by Jay on
Aug 19, 2007 1:46 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
by oxforddave on
Aug 19, 2007 2:15 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
Garko had a 710 OPS in April. But you say "he performed." By that point, Marte was on the DL and hasn't gotten another chance.
Cabrera did not "force his way" onto the roster. That would imply huge numbers in Buffalo, which he didn't even have a chance to do. There was an opening for him -- they felt confident he could be at least as good as Rouse and, at least against RHP, maybe as good as Barfield as well.
There is no reality-based measure by which Garko had done more, shown more or proven more than Marte. I've been pimping AstroCab for a full year, but he too is not more accomplished than Marte.
by Jay on
Aug 19, 2007 2:37 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
I don't think that Andy Marte will ever make a substantial contribution to the Indians pennant hopes. You think that he'll be insturmental in the Indians team development.
We'll see.
by mauichuck on
Aug 19, 2007 2:40 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
What I think is that given everything we know about him, it would be unwise not to give him an extended tryout -- months, not days. I think there is very little chance he can't manage a 775 OPS. And I think the upside is huge -- for many years to come, and even just for next season.
PECOTA showed him with a 40% chance of developing into a star by 2010, and 20% a superstar. On any team I'm running, we're giving him a nice long tryout. That's all.
by Jay on
Aug 19, 2007 2:46 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
Both Marte and Garko were given chances with the big league club last year, and this is what I was talking about. Marte hit .226/.287/.421/.708; Garko hit .292/.359/.470/.829. Despite this, Marte was handed 3B in spring training, and Garko barely made the team. Defensible, given their overall backgrounds, and defensive abilities.
Now Marte struggled (very limited stats) and then got hurt. Rehabbed in Buffalo, and still did not hit. Still got brought back to the big team. Wedge then preferred Blake/Garko to Marte/Blake. Marte got optioned. Still did not hit in Buffalo. Blake cooled down, Marte hit a little in Buffalo, but not enough. Last I checked Marte's stats were still worse than Brad Snyder's and Luis Rivas's.
Is there anything in this recap that is wrong?
All Marte has to do is hit .300 with some power in the minors for a month (a freaking single month), and he'd be back with the big team. He is given more leniency than anybody currently in the minors. But he just can't seem to do it.
I don't know. Maybe Bobby Cox and John Schuerholz knew something. Nahh, they are baseball idiots.
by oxforddave on
Aug 20, 2007 10:23 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
by hans on
Aug 20, 2007 10:38 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
The real mystery with Marte's performance isn't with his power (26 XBH coming off rehab) or average (nobody cares). The real mystery is with his evaporating walk rate -- under .05 in Buffalo this year, over .11 for 2003-2006.
Marte is a work-the-count hitter. His whole game keys around selectivity at the plate, and he just hasn't done it this year.
For me, it's an Occam's Razor question. What is the simplest explanation for this development?
- Marte lost the ability to be selective?
- Marte is hurt?
- Marte is bored?
- Marte is frustrated?
That he could be hurt or bored or frustrated makes all the sense in the world. That he could "lose" his ability to be selective doesn't make any sense.
So the simplest, and best, explanation is just this: He's the same Andy Marte he was a year ago. He's just a little hurt and/or bored and/or frustrated, and he hasn't had a chance to settle in. Now, you might think he wasn't anything special a year ago, either. That's fine. But nothing he's done this season should have changed your opinion, one way or another. For any player, you have to trust the track record more than the fluke seasona.
by Jay on
Aug 21, 2007 2:12 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
by SpringTrainingFun on
Aug 21, 2007 2:21 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
by oxforddave on
Aug 21, 2007 8:03 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
ISO power (SLG - AVG):
Marte - .195
Garko - .178
ISO discipline (OBP-AVG):
Marte - .061
Garko - .067
K%
Marte - 23.2
Garko - 20.0
BB%
Marte - 7.3
Garko - 7.0
All remarkably similar. Where the difference comes is in BABIP:
Marte - .264
Garko - .333
That .090 point difference in BABIP likely accounts for the .120 difference in OPS. The question then is whether or not Marte's BIP data suggests some substantive reason why Marte's numbers are lower (or why Garko's higher - Garko's BABIP data this season is .357).
Here are their BIP numbers for 2006:
GB/FB:
Marte - 0.70
Garko - 1.03
LD%:
Marte - 17.5
Garko - 16.6
GB%:
Marte - 34.1
Garko - 42.4
FB%:
Marte - 48.4
Garko - 41.1
IFFB%:
Marte - 13.1
Garko - 8.1
HR/FB%:
Marte - 8.2
Garko - 11.3
I'm not an expert, but there are some fundamental differences here. Marte is much more of a flyball hitter, which means he's likely to have a slightly lower BABIP than Garko (ground balls go for a higher average than fly balls). What's hurting Marte though (and helping Garko) are the last two numbers. Marte's 13.1 IFFB (13% of his flyballs are infield flys - almost automatic outs) is bad. He's also not generating the HR/FB% one might hope for a power hitter.
So...Marte's not going to turn into Garko, because he's a different kind of hitter. But there's probably not any reason to think he could be just as good, if not better. If he can figure out how to cut down on his infield flys (likely pitches he's getting fooled on) and/or drive a few more fly balls, his numbers would look a lot better.
by APV on
Aug 21, 2007 4:45 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
by NickFantana on
Aug 21, 2007 5:02 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
As you later note, these are very different hitters. Hard contact is Garko's whole game -- he might be considered an extreme contact guy if he weren't fairly strong. He's not quite as selective as Marte and doesn't have his power -- Marte is much more of a three-true-outcomes guy.
But Garko is way in front in terms of putting the bat on the ball, and I expect he'll out-BABIP Marte substantially for as long as they're both playing, even if they're both quite successful. And what we've seen first-hand with both Sizemore and Garko, backed up by more general research, is that prospects who would be categorized as "contact hitters," and who can reach the majors as hitters without developing much selectivity, often have the ability to develop selectivity a year or two later.
The last thing I read about infield flys is that there's some evidence that inducing them is a repeatable skill for some pitchers, but not so much for hitters. So that part does bode well for Marte. We do know that the ratio of outfield flys to HR is a lot more luck-driven than a casual fan would expect it to be, and that's especially true for a prospect whose raw strength is not really in question.
by Jay on
Aug 21, 2007 6:51 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
by gahnki on
Aug 21, 2007 7:12 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
I agree with this, but I wanted to parse the meaning of it.
When Marte was hurt, April 22, Blake's line = .288/.314/.602
When he was eligible to return, May 21, Blake's line = .341/.423/.764
Casey's current season line: .342/.442/.783
I am wondering if Marte could have been expected to produce equivalent to that this year if he had gotten Blake's PA's at 3B.
Marte's 50th percentile performance as predicted by PECOTA: .319/.436/.755
I think it's an open question and, if baseball were played in a scrutiny-free environment, I think Marte would have gotten Blake's 3B time.
by NickFantana on
Aug 19, 2007 2:02 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
Marte was sent down because they didn't want him on the bench in Cleveland. So the only real question was, who get to keep the starting job, Marte or Blake? The answer at the time seemed clear, and I don't think it was the wrong one.
by Jay on
Aug 19, 2007 2:14 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
But your point is well-taken; at the point that Marte came back off the DL, myself and everyone else would have been confused and upset.
by NickFantana on
Aug 19, 2007 2:17 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
by fwembt on
Aug 19, 2007 1:20 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
by supermarioelia on
Aug 19, 2007 1:26 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
by fwembt on
Aug 19, 2007 3:03 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
by supermarioelia on
Aug 19, 2007 3:07 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
You just have to hope he's actually so talented that when he actually focuses and tries, he'll be a major league player. At this point, we don't need anything incredible out of Marte-just league average 3b play.
by afh4 on
Aug 19, 2007 12:19 PM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
by zempf on
Aug 19, 2007 12:31 PM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
by NickFantana on
Aug 19, 2007 12:33 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
by JulioBernazard on
Aug 19, 2007 12:46 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
by ASP on
Aug 19, 2007 12:48 PM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
by CarnegieAndOntario on
Aug 19, 2007 12:52 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
I think you gotta give him an extended look next year at 3rd. He is just too good of a talent not too.
by ClarkM on
Aug 19, 2007 1:10 PM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
by palcal on
Aug 19, 2007 1:20 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
by Jay on
Aug 19, 2007 4:56 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
More likely I see Blake coming back as the 3B with Marte on the roster and he's going to have to do what Garko did this year and hit when given the opportunity when Blake doesn't play or plays in the OF.
by hans on
Aug 19, 2007 5:39 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
The odds that he'll succeed given a short leash are very, very long. He's always succeeded, and never quickly. The Indians knew this and never would have acquired him if they didn't think that, at some point, they would give him a few months to settle in as a starter.
by Jay on
Aug 19, 2007 6:00 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
by hans on
Aug 19, 2007 6:09 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
In any event, Shapiro runs this team, and I don't think he's going to give up Marte the way he gave up BP.
by Jay on
Aug 19, 2007 6:13 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
Jay, it's pretty clear that you are a strong advocate of Marte. It's probably fair to say that you strongly supported the trade, IMO.
The reason I started the thread and the thing that caught my eye was that Marte is out of options next year. That's a huge issue, in my mind.
The Tribe FO knew this about Marte and so they likely expected Marte to come in and be the "major league ready" 3B that he was touted to be - Atlanta's top minor league prospect and all ...
The fact that he hasn't stuck on the ML roster to this point has to be a disappointment for the Tribe brass. They gave up their starting LF, a backup catcher, and a legitimate middle reliever for him and Shoppach; and so far, Shoppach is the one who has stuck in the bigs.
Most fans were loathing Blake last year but they're thankful that the Tribe still had him as they would have been in a terrible fix this year if they didn't have him.
The Tribe traded Kouzmanoff thinking that Marte was the 3B of the future, and he might still be that guy.
Marte's defense in spring training was not good. he was tentative. I recall commenting as much during that time. Jay has stated that his minor league manager says he's a solid defender and I'd be an idiot to dispute as much; but what I saw with this spring on numerous occasions was a guy who was tentative and unsure. Maybe he was just having a bad spring - SSS and all.
But right now, there's a fair amount of doubt that he'll be the Tribe's 3B of the future. And that's certainly not the way the trade was presented at that time by anyone who was an advocate of the trade.
by SpringTrainingFun on
Aug 19, 2007 6:32 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
by woodsmeister on
Aug 19, 2007 9:07 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
You write:
The fact that he hasn't stuck on the ML roster to this point has to be a disappointment for the Tribe brass.
I think in fact this is far from reality. I am quite certain that they were pleased with how 2006 went for Marte. He pressed too much in April, but he rallied for a few brilliant months and handled himself just fine in the majors the last two months. Nobody was expecting anything better out of him.
As for this season, he didn't "fail to stick," he got injured. Yes, he did struggle for a few weeks before that, but he always does.
This is not to say the Indians are totally satisfied by what they've seen out of him, but the organization had every opportunity to get him more big-league experience last year and chose not to. This year, they chose to play the hot hand with Blake even at the risk of burning Marte's last option.
I'm not saying they were wrong in either case, but in either case, it was their choice, and the only way Marte could have forced a different choice was by hitting the ground running and tearing things up, either in Cleveland in April or in Buffalo in June. But Marte never hits the ground running. And they know that about him.
The Indians are not impulsive or forgetful as the fans are. They stress level-headedness and consistency. They've known all along that Marte needed an extended opportunity in order to show what he can do, and they know full well that they haven't given it to him.
And my point all along has been, none of this reflects on Marte at all. The only new information we have on Marte this season is, he's had a minor injury, and he hasn't responded well to being in Triple-A for a third year.
I don't think either new piece of information has much bearing on his ability to be our 3B long-term, and yes, I think the Indians see it that way as well. As you wrote, I think they have to see it that way.
by Jay on
Aug 20, 2007 12:08 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
That must be some some good sh#t you're partaking.
Hilarious.
You mean well but you may have over estimated Marte's ML abilities.
I hope I'm way off and hope that you and the Tribe's brass is correct in this trade. I'm, not confident, however.
by SpringTrainingFun on
Aug 20, 2007 12:28 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
That said ... Crisp has a 717 OPS since leaving, so if I were concerned with it, I wouldn't exactly be losing sleep.
by Jay on
Aug 20, 2007 12:33 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
The Tribe FO put that much confidence in Marte being all that, they didn't require a young arm in return is what makes it disappointing. The point being that Marte was the centerpiece, the catch, the next big thing. And to this point he hasn't been able to stick in the majors - it's disappointing.
And now he's out of options.
by SpringTrainingFun on
Aug 20, 2007 7:48 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
With a 717, Crisp would have been one of the least productive LF in the majors. Dellucci is probably going to be more productive and will get paid less.
Crisp was not a great loss for us. Marte was meant to be one key piece -- and still might be. There is no such thing as a "centerpiece" in baseball.
It's time to move on with your life.
by Jay on
Aug 20, 2007 12:03 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
And my posting the thread had nothing to do with the trade as it is long been history. The point was that he's out of options and I wasn't aware of it, so it makes next season very important for him and the Tribe.
I guess I'm hoping this isn't another Brandon Phillips situation where they give up on a talent too soon.
You also make a good point that the Tribe had every chance to get an extended look at Marte last year but chose not to do so. That's a head scratcher as they were going nowhere in the standings.
by SpringTrainingFun on
Aug 20, 2007 1:01 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
by Brick. on
Aug 20, 2007 1:36 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
I have always tried to emphasize, when talking about stuff like service time issues, that the Indians are never going to suppress service time at the expense of a pennant race -- Carmona right now -- or even when there's a clear-cut development call.
Take Crisp in 2003 as an example. He's tearing it up for two months in Buffalo -- the 945 OPS doesn't look like total domination, until you notice the .360 average, the .434 OBP, the 20 SB. The only thing lacking is the power, and he's not going to magically acquire that by staying in Triple-A. He's done with the minors.
They could have left Crisp in Buffalo, pointlessly, for another 40 days in 2003, in order to get him past a future Super Two hump, which is not hard to see coming. They certainly weren't in a pennant race. They didn't need someone in CF -- Bradley six games a week in CF even after Crisp arrived, and he didn't hit the DL for two months later. And they certainly had other in options in LF. But they simply weren't going to have him sit in Buffalo for another 40 days with nothing more to learn. Even with an adverse service time consideration, they preferred to have him continue his development in the majors.
The service time thing is interesting, and it often comes into play because so often, there is no clear-cut decision as to whether a guy is ready or not -- take Ben Francisco this year, or Gutierrez last year. So you track service time to make sure you're not making a trivial decision that ends up costing a million or two. But any significant roster upgrade is always worth an extra million or two, so in case like Carmona -- or even Shoppach a year ago -- you just can't sweat it.
by Jay on
Aug 20, 2007 2:18 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
If the Indians wanted Covelli back, which of our top three upper-level pitching prospects would you offer? What's that? None of them? Because it's just Coco Crisp?
As surely as I sit here regretting that Burger King pit stop, Shapiro asked for Manny Delcarmen instead of Gil Mota. We didn't get him. Boston still overpaid -- probably their two top position player prospects for a tweener outfielder, a decent backup catcher, and a so-so reliever.
here'sa similarly unproductive discussion of the trade. I don't think anybody really has a handle on this, but the people that ought to -- you know, the Indians -- don't seem concerned. Good enough for me.
by fleerdon on
Aug 20, 2007 5:02 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
"He's playing outstanding defense, but he's still a work in progress offensively."
Of course, one can still be a work-in-progress while in the major leagues. Nobody expected Marte to be an outstanding hitter as a rookie.
by Jay on
Aug 20, 2007 12:24 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
by GermanysTribeFan on
Aug 19, 2007 1:50 PM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
by supermarioelia on
Aug 19, 2007 1:52 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
by GermanysTribeFan on
Aug 19, 2007 1:56 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
Maybe excellent players get bored when repeating a level. What a shocker that would be.
by Jay on
Aug 19, 2007 2:32 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
by supermarioelia on
Aug 19, 2007 2:39 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
by Gradyforpresident on
Aug 19, 2007 2:03 PM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
by GermanysTribeFan on
Aug 19, 2007 2:04 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
by Brick. on
Aug 19, 2007 2:33 PM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
by Jay on
Aug 19, 2007 2:39 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
For example - with Marte's injury and Blake's improved performance Marte gets sent down to AAA to insure that he gets enough AB's to continue development. Blake goes on a tear for a while but eventually regresses and slows down. I personally believe this is due to his wearing down.
Instead, if the Indians don't feel the need to push him and play him every day you could have Marte up playing 4-5 times a week and Blake playing one, he get's the spot start at 1B (because it's just not crowded enough over there), a day or so every week in the OF, and (for a limited time - CALL NOW) he can fill in for Pronk when he gets hit or strains his hammy. The added bonus, he get's more time off and hopefully won't wear down. To do this, you DFA Trot, give more playing time to Gutz in RF, and call up Marte. Or you just wait until rosters expand and do it in practice without DFA'ing Trot.
The real question to me is does Marte put up better numbers than Trot? Well that and the question of going with an infield so young down the stretch during a close playoff race.
by mjmarble on
Aug 19, 2007 3:58 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
by Jay on
Aug 19, 2007 4:54 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
by Joe on
Aug 19, 2007 3:34 PM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
by mjmarble on
Aug 19, 2007 4:00 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
by Joe on
Aug 19, 2007 4:20 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
by mauichuck on
Aug 19, 2007 4:21 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
by Joe on
Aug 19, 2007 4:34 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
I just am a firm believer in Barfield and his being the long term solution to 2B.
by mjmarble on
Aug 19, 2007 4:26 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
by gahnki on
Aug 19, 2007 8:20 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
by Joe on
Aug 19, 2007 8:27 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
by supermarioelia on
Aug 19, 2007 8:30 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
by Joe on
Aug 19, 2007 8:35 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
by supermarioelia on
Aug 19, 2007 8:33 PM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
For a power guy who tends to put the ball in play rather than strike out a ton, he seems to have a remarkable amount of unproductive at bats. He just seems like he has a lot of work left to be a really productive hitter. That said, I wouldn't mind seeing him at 3B next year provided he is in a lineup which generates enough offense to carry him until he gets a few hundred ML at bats. Not sure if that will be the case or not. His defense has been very good at Buffalo, lauded by coaches and scouts alike this summer.
BTW, Adam Miller is back, pitching in relief today, striking out 2 in a scoreless, hitless inning.
by mcrose on
Aug 19, 2007 10:24 PM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
I didn't list Blake there because I'd really like to see him become a super-utility player at this point in his career. The fact that he can play so many positions would still assure a good number of appearances and possibly open up an extra roster spot that would have previously been occupied by multiple utility/bench guys (like Gomez and Nixon are now).
If you were to convert Blake to a full time super utility, you could certainly give the final bench spot on the 25-man to Marte. Actually fitting him into the lineup often enough so he can get the fair shot referenced above is significantly more difficult though.
I'll just skip ahead to my point: Peralta hasn't done anything to warrant a trade/bench time, it's too early in his career to give up on Barfield, and it's way too early to really consider Cabrera as a major league starter next year. I would also agree that Marte never really got a true shot as the team's starting thirdbaseman, but likely would have if he hadn't gotten hurt.
I think the team should take advantage of the fact that Cabrera is so young and still has many options left to finish the Marte Project. Let Cabrera wait his turn in AAA, or even on the bench and start Marte in 2008. This may not be particuarly fair or an efficient use of resources, but Marte's time in the minors is up and I think it would be extremely foolish to just give up based on what data they have of him at the major league level.
Prepping Peralta for possible playing time at 3b might not hurt either, but Blake is always there as a safety net if Marte turns out to be a flop. You have to give the kid a real evaluation at some point, so next year seems to be it as to whether he sticks or not.
Plus, maybe if they assure him the 2008 starting spot now, he'll be more motivated in AAA for the remainder of the year and show he still hasn't lost what made him successful in the past.
by Pronk33 on
Aug 19, 2007 10:57 PM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
by gahnki on
Aug 19, 2007 11:25 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
Of course I say all this with the hopes that AstroCab somehow turns out to be some jewel of a hitter/defender and more than Johnny Mac (who also is GREAT!).
by mjmarble on
Aug 19, 2007 11:37 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
by gahnki on
Aug 19, 2007 11:40 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
I addressed this before -- nobody needs to be left out.
Everyone but Cabrera bats righty, and Cabrera can play 3B if needed. There are more than enough starts and innings to go around, and for three guys to share two spots (and back up a third spot) seems like a great way to balance the desire to develop young players with the desire to protect them -- and the desire to leverage platoons.
by Jay on
Aug 20, 2007 12:13 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
A-Anyone entertaining of the idea of trading Peralta, even on the most speculative level, still seems crazy to me at this point. Of the players being discussed (sans the Garko tangent), he is the only one who has shown real, large sample, offensive ability on the major league level. Combine with that his contract situation and, as I've said before, I think it'd be nearly impossible to get value for him. Especially since baseball types (i.e. Steve Phillips and Jim Bowden) seem to undervalue him because he looks sort of fat.
B-I don't think anyone here has seen the real Marte. The talk of him sulking around in ST, the armchair analysis of his long swing, it's all a lot of fun but it jibes so poorly with his performance on his first trip through the minors that I just can't get behind it. I'm of the mind that a player physically cannot do what Marte did in 2004 and 2005 without having an incredible amount of talent and 'makeup.'
That's the real Marte to me and it will be even if he never makes the majors again. Whatever happened in the interim to change him from being that player to being something else (if he is something else) is the incredible fluke. There's no way he got real lucky for 2 years running, at that f'ing age, with a swing that couldn't translate to the majors. His peripherals were too good.
It's a weird distinction but one that's important to me. His performance wasn't a fluke. It was too stone cold lock down incredible. If he can't get back there, the fluke is whatever happened in between.
Of course, that doesn't help us a lot in deciding what he is going forward. My opinion is probably pretty obvious but I want a minimum of 400 Major League ABs next year and a sports psychologist.
by afh4 on
Aug 20, 2007 1:14 AM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
by NickFantana on
Aug 20, 2007 12:00 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
by Roger Dorn on
Aug 20, 2007 2:18 PM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
"First shot at the big leagues, I am pretty nervous."
"Man, it's cold and I can't believe a game just got snowed out. It never snows in the D.R."
"My batting average is the lowest on the team, I am pressing so that I am not a disappointment."
"Ouch, I am injured."
"Casey is playing well, I need to play really well when I get off the DL."
"Back to Buffalo? Not again! I don't like Buffalo very much and I feel like I have earned my chance at the bigs."
"I am really feeling the pressure here, I need to be raking, but the injury is still affecting me some and I just can't get on track."
I know this exercise was pretty ridiculous, but confidence certainly plays a big factor with young players. I personally believe that if Marte gets on a hot streak, he'll get his confidence back and we will be more inclined to go with his earlier track record in the minors, than his off-year this year.
by Roger Dorn on
Aug 20, 2007 2:29 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
by afh4 on
Aug 20, 2007 2:36 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
by SpringTrainingFun on
Aug 20, 2007 2:51 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
by Roger Dorn on
Aug 20, 2007 2:56 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
by SpringTrainingFun on
Aug 20, 2007 3:04 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
by Roger Dorn on
Aug 20, 2007 3:12 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
Further up on the page, you actually said that I brought up the trade first -- which you apparently hallucinated.
Obsessed.
by Jay on
Aug 20, 2007 3:16 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
So, I haven't brought up the trade. I did not think it was relevant to the discussion.
by oxforddave on
Aug 20, 2007 10:54 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
by Mark Shapiro on
Aug 20, 2007 11:04 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
by Jay on
Aug 20, 2007 3:11 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
Spring training is one or two weeks ?
Ahhhhhh, OK.
by SpringTrainingFun on
Aug 20, 2007 3:48 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
I was just trying to bring a little more information to what is already a wildly speculative argument.
Looking back, I see you might be talking about his defense in ST. I don't really know who you're responding to. Sorry if I'm snitty but I don't think I've brought up Marte's ST stats ever, so this might be directed entirely at someone else.
I've been demolishing a bathroom all day. I've lost a considerable amount of blood on tile cuts.
by afh4 on
Aug 20, 2007 4:17 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
by fleerdon on
Aug 20, 2007 5:06 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
"Oh man, I totally demolished the bathroom out on the golf course this morning. It was ugly."
"Geeze, did you see him on the dance floor last night? He was totally demolishing the bathroom out there."
by Brick. on
Aug 20, 2007 5:58 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
"Ugh. Buck-fifty Marg Night just demolished my bathroom."
Mm. Too literal.
"Whoa. Marte's oh-fer against the Royals was a real bathroom-demolisher."
"I can't believe he'd make a pass at my date. I'm gonna demolish his bathroom."
"How'd you do at karaoke night?" "D.T.B." "Bummer."
by fleerdon on
Aug 20, 2007 7:50 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
can't wait to work this into a gamethread in the future.
"The brontosaurus Jesus was riding side saddle was acting up, so he dismounted and demolished its bathroom for five or ten minutes. Ever since then, it has been much more obedient."
by Brick. on
Aug 20, 2007 11:02 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
I seem to recall some kind of scandel where Latin players were saying they were younger than they really are. I also recall that some measures were taken by mlb to protect against this, but I do not know what.
by dvd1204 on
Aug 20, 2007 6:45 PM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
by supermarioelia on
Aug 21, 2007 5:58 PM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
He probably is a little bored.
by emd2k3 on
Aug 22, 2007 4:25 PM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
Not that it would happen, but I'd love to see Blake dealt in the offseason while he has value. But only if AsCab shows enough to be the backup for next year.
Trading Blake allows Marte to not worry about losing his job (hopefully increasing his chances of playing well). It also frees up a spot for Gutierrez to play in RF every day next year. Also perhaps keeping Choo on the roster. Then we can also deal Francisco to help alleviate the backlog. Na ... am just rambling now.
by talonk on
Aug 22, 2007 7:07 PM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
That comment is just ridiculous.
Having Blake on the roster has saved the Tribe this year. He's played a very respectable defense and has hit at the level that he's performed over his career.
That is to say that he's done his job. Hafner, for example, has not done his job this year. But that happens.
Blake absolutely saved the butts of the FO this year. They had Marte as their starting 3B and then he got hurt and hasn't been able to bounce back. He hasn't been able to stick on the major league level.
Blake is one of the Tribe's most valuable position players from the standpoint that he can play multiple positions pretty well, and comes at a salary that up to this point has been very reasonable.
The Tribe FO only hopes that they can hold on to Blake for a decent price salary-wise for the next 1-3 years. It's possible that a team will offer him a multi-year contract for far beyond what the Tribe is willing to afford.
by SpringTrainingFun on
Aug 22, 2007 9:38 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
Marte has not "failed to stick," he hasn't been given the opportunity. Every time that error is repeated, I will repeat my correction.
by Jay on
Aug 22, 2007 9:42 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
Marte has had some injuries, and certainly he can't be blamed entirely for that. That stuff happens.
But maybe he's injury prone, maybe not - we don't know. There have been players in the past who would have been valuable if not for their tendency to get injured.
Blake has been more valuable on this roster as an (when considered as an everyday position player who plays multiple positions) than most fans acknowledge, despite his shortcomings.
by SpringTrainingFun on
Aug 22, 2007 10:31 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
I also believe that Blake is at a great sell high point. His numbers look very good to the naked eye, and would be attractive to a Boston, NY, Anaheim as a super utility. I just think if he isn't around next year, the younger guys won't press.
by talonk on
Aug 22, 2007 10:45 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
Now I don't want to put words in your mouth, but are you saying that Marte's failure to stay on the ML roster has been or will be due to Blake's presence on the roster ? Because Marte felt pressure from Blake ? That's the way it came off.
Correct me if I'm wrong in the way I took that.
by SpringTrainingFun on
Aug 22, 2007 11:17 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
My comment would be for next season. Marte has always struggled when starting a new level/season (look at Jay's earlier reference). What I would be concerned about is that Marte and the Tribe brass know he has to stick next year no matter what. And neither of them wants him to be a bench player.
So if he gets the job in ST, as I think he will, and he struggles for the first few weeks, with Blake on the roster, he might also subconsciously wonder when Blake takes over 3B for the second season in a row.
Also, I believe Choo is also out of options. Trading Blake for a servicable reliver or prospect basically opens the door completely for Marte at third, and then also opens a spot for Choo to be a LH hitter on the bench. If our offense recovers this year (and presumably next year as well), we could survive the growing pains of Marte for a full year batting 8th/9th.
Now if AsCab shows he isnt ready, I wouldn't deal Blake. But if AsCab is ready, we would not really need Blake. As good as Blake has been, he really isn't a stud or a "keeper". He's nice to have, but not really a key component either IMO.
by talonk on
Aug 23, 2007 2:39 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
Surely he can't hit any worse than some of these guys. I don't know who to send down, Barfield I guess, then there's no 2b/SS backup so no I guess...
by Brick. on
Aug 22, 2007 7:56 PM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
by Joe on
Aug 23, 2007 1:48 AM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Re: Marte
Marte has always had a big walk rate. If he's walking more in the last few weeks, it's only a return to form. It is possible that the Indians are having him work on shortening his swing to strike out less, but there's really no salvaging his season at this point.
Marte has never been a high-average guy and isn't going to be one. Scanning over his 2006 log, he had as many three-walk games as three-hit games -- one each. He reached base four times in two games, five times once.
by Jay on
Aug 23, 2007 1:57 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
















