Reining in Expectations for Marte
by hans on Jun 7, 2008 8:05 PM EDT
Email
PrintI think the majority here would support the idea that Andy Marte should be receiving more plate appearances than he has thus far and some would argue should be given the third base job outright (with Blake moving around in a super utility role since all of the planets have aligned and Bizarro Blake is knocking in RISP likes its going out of style). Some have dissented and stated that Marte doesn't deserve the shot because of not showing anything that would be considered "forcing his way into the lineup" this year or in his time in the Indians organization in general. I don't want to get into this argument again as I think it was covered well in this article Jay wrote back on May 14th of this year. What I want to talk about is what we should expect from Marte assuming he will be given more plate appearances going forward (although this isn't necessarily going to happen with Wedge in charge and the offense struggling as it has).
As with any rookie or young player in general, the lack of an extensive history at the major league level lends itself to greater variability in projecting what kind of production you are likely to receive in those early years at the major league level. It is quite possible that Marte will be much worse offensively at third base than Casey Blake this year. But, I'm coming to believe that the Indians need to trust their talent evaluation. If he was good enough to trade for, than he should still be good enough as he ages into his prototypical prime years of production (Marte is only 24 right now). This belief is directed toward the high end talents that the team acquires, such as the players received in the Colon trade, Marte, and even a guy like Barfield to a degree. Many things can stop a prospect from becoming a regular in the bigs, but most of them can be observed (i.e. a major injury, development of bad hitting habits, exacerbation of an already bad habit as a player moves through levels, off the field problems, etc.) But simply losing the talent the player has already displayed is not likely one of them. The Indians need to trust their judgment unless there is an identifiable problem (and I don't want here all you armchair scouts and your claims that Marte has developed a "hole" in his swing in the past year or two, thanks for your subjective assessment, but I'll pass).
So this brings me to what was expected of Marte this year by some of the better projections systems used in projecting future performance. I'm starting off with PECOTA's projections:
A weighted mean projection of 460 plate appearances:
.737 OPS and an EqA of .257
Not exactly "eye poppin", and he's going to have to start getting some more playing time to hit that plate appearance mark, but you get the idea. He'd be somewhere around avg. to below avg. for AL 3B. Now check out the next two lines:
75th percentile = .782 OPS and a .276 EqA
25th percentile = .647 OPS and a .231 EqA
That bottom number is pretty pathetic, while that top number is just as likely yet gives us an above avg. third baseman in the AL.
You know who currently has an actual OPS similar to Marte's mean projected OPS? Yeah that's right Casey Blake at .722 prior to today's game. What I'm getting at here is its likely that if Marte is given the at-bats that most of us would like (including me) that for this season his production is likely to be somewhere near what we are going to get out of Casey Blake. Much like Gutierez, there is a high risk/high reward in playing Marte this season, and increased playing time could allow Marte to hit near his 75th percentile projection or more likely his mean projection, Neither of which is near the "future all-star" level that was mentioned when we traded for Marte, but not terrible either, and certainly not going to be the reason this team's offense tanks this year (Mr. Hafner and Mr. Martinez, that's your cross to bear).
To bolster my point that although most of us agree Marte should be playing more, we'll need to temper our expectations for his performance, are the OPS projections for the other major projection systems:
Marcels predicts 248 plate appearences and a .710 OPS
Bill James predicted 154 at-bats* and a .755 OPS
CHONE predicted 508 PAs and a .725 OPS
Miner predicted 469 PAs and a .725 OPS
ZiPS predicted 497 at-bats* and a .702 OPS
*plate-appearances not projected
Marte needs to be playing, but he also needs to be hitting in the bottom third of the lineup and not be counted on as a major offensive performer. (I'll argue my socks off that he's a better defensive third baseman than Casey Blake though and this alone should be the reason Marte needs to play more).
112 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
This makes a lot of sense, but it doesn’t seem to matter. The problem is that the Indians front office isn’t even sure if Marte is a replacement-level third baseman. He’s not going to get a chance in Cleveland, and he doesn’t help his cause on the rare occasions when he does get an at-bat with runners in scoring position. He would be better served playing every day somewhere, but it certainly won’t be on a Wedge-managed team unless we have further injuries. I think he will be gone by the All Star break.
Great write-up hans. It exemplifies every thing that’s wrong with SABRmetrics. I see Marcels, CHONE, Miner, ZIPS and the infallible baseball genius Bill James quoted here and the repeated use of the term “projected” in one form or another. And I know that I’ve been warned not to be “subjective” but then again that’s what I do. So let’s do a little “objective” evaluation here.
Players on average play to the league average. Any statistician will tell you that, and the math is set up to produce exactly those results. But it’s identifying the non-average, end-of-the-bell-shaped-curve player where a manager and GM make their money. You and I almost alone on this site were early on in violent agreement on Rick Ankiel’s future – the right end of the bell shaped curve. Marte just might be on the left end.
Has anyone gone back and looked at Marcels and CHONE’s and Bill James’s track record for this year? Weren’t the Indians and Tigers supposed to be tearin’ the AL Central up – the Twins drifting along and Ozzie screamin’ into the cameras two or three times a week (oh, yean they got that one right)? Look these “projections” just like everything else in baseball, are fallible and I don’t care how much “higher” math or composite stats they use – they can be off base. Sometimes way off base.
But then again I can see how the scouts can be seduced by Marte’s flashes of talent. Like I said before, the kid looks like a ballplayer. The problem’s been, up to now, the Indians haven’t had the luxury of risking a chance at the play-offs to see what he can do. Now that our play-offs chances seem to be receding into the distance, he may get that chance. Comparing Marte’s “projections” against Blake’s flesh-and-blood performance is sophistry. Wedge, Shelton, Shapiro et al see what the see from Marte and what they’ve seen so far just doesn’t cut it.
"the most vehement Yankee-hating guy I know" - Jay
Going back and looking at 2007 predictions. No Marcels, Chone, etc. But the Sabermetrically inclined predictions (Neyer, and the two from BP) did pretty well. These projections based on “higher” math don’t claim to be perfect, they just claim to be better than Average Joe, or whoever ESPN is trying to tell you is an expert, insider, or analyst. And in 2007, they looked to have been right.
I’ll give you that comparing the actual production give by Blake to what most projection systems have predicted for Marte this season presents plenty of holes in the argument. Certainly it wouldn’t make any sense to do so if there was comparable sample sizes for each player, but alas there isn’t since Marte has a grand total 51 plate appearances this year, far short of drawing any statistically meaningful conclusions.
I also should make it clear that I only offer up Blake’s performance (which most on here complain about) as an example of what some of the projection systems (specifically PECOTA) predict Marte could do given the chance. Point being all of this clammering for Marte needing to get a chance (which I support fully) shouldn’t blind us to the likelihood that for this season he isn’t going to be any better than league avg. and likely even below that level.
Andy Marte has taught me that a player can actually have a negative OPS+ number. Never knew that.
I’ve been in some heated Marte talks here on LGT. But my bone of contention is that Andy hasn’t shown ANYTHING that merits more playtime. He hasn’t had back to back games where he looked like a major league player. Hell, he hasn’t had a multi-hit game in his past 30 starts.
(and I don’t want here all you armchair scouts and your claims that Marte has developed a “hole” in his swing in the past year or two, thanks for your subjective assessment, but I’ll pass).
You may not want to hear it, but it’s extremely possible that this is why he has been struggling when he’s been in there.
In 2006 he had 357 at bats putting up a .260 BA and an OPS of .773. In 2007 he had 352 at bats in Buffalo putting up a .267 BA with an OPS of .766.
Pretty disappointing compared to earlier numbers. The injury trouble he’s had combined with boredom at the Triple A level may have lead to some bad habits that he has developed at the plate. I wish there was some video on him in Buffalo compared to some video when he was in the Atlanta organization. It would be very interesting to compare those two swings.
I don’t think hans is saying that it isn’t possible that he has developed a hole in his swing, its just that none of us on here have the expertise to definetively say that he has.
This is exactly my point. It’s possible that Marte has developed some bad hitting habits, etc.. and/or had these bad habits previously, but the analysis to determine this isn’t available for us on this site to evaluate (which gahnki points out himself when he talks about wishing there was video to compare Marte’s time in Buffalo to his time in the Atlanta organization).
What I’m getting at in short is that I believe Marte should be playing fairly regularly and that I accept that he’s not likely going to hit that much better than league avg or slightly below league avg. for this season.
But if you’re going to get roughly the same numbers from Blake and Marte who do you think is going to play?
The guy who gets paid millions or the kid?
It’s just a rough situation for the management/FO to handle.
Well this is the argument I hoped to avoid, but here it goes anyways. It should have never been an either/or situation for this season. Blake has the versatility to play multiple positions (RF of which is probably his best defensive one), yet up until recently hadn’t been moved off of the third base bag. Blake should have been in the outfield when Michaels and Gutz were struggling, and Blake can play 1B when Garko struggles and needs a day off.
Marte wouldn’t be taking away any at-bats from Blake per se, as much as he would be from which ever player (1B, RF, LF,) was struggling, injured, or needing a day off.
Oh no…I thought Blake should’ve been a supersub to. it’s just that we’ve waiting too long to set defined roles and now we’re in this mess.
What mess?
As of game 1, we had CC’s last gasp and a team that won 96 games last year with the same roster. Bosses made a decision that the prudent course was to play the veterans that got us the 96 wins until some other evaluation became possible.
Game 41 allowed a new evaluation whereby it is now clearer that this team will not be able to duplicate last season’s successes. The new prudent course of action is to run the team in a more conventional fashion involving the development of young talent. At game 82, there will be another evaluation and bosses will again direct a course of action prudently.
The situation with Marte/Blake is clearly a mess. There was no plan as to how to work Marte in with Blake. Marte plays at random time (s) every few weeks and there is no way to accurately judge his play. It took an extreme amount of injuries and struggles to open up space for him on the field. No decision was announced that he would have a regular number of days to play each week. It is still going by the managers feel.
But who would announce that Player A would be granted three (or two, or whatever) days a week? I don’t recall such a thing ever happening.
Seriously? It happens all the time. Any time there’s a player on a roster who seems to be something in between an everyday starter and a bench guy, the media asks how much playing time he’s going to get, and the GM and/or manager usually give an answer, because usually, they actually have a plan in mind. Think about Dellucci or Alex Cora when we signed them, or Gutierrez when we called him up. There is nothing at all unusual about this.
Yes, that’s true for an Alex Cora type player, an established spare part. But what if you had Felix Pie? Would you announce that you’re going to give him three starts a week, come hell or high water? Maybe that’s the case, but…
Well, this is just a big ball of false premises.
First … if it was Felix Pie, yes.
Second … there is no “hell or high water” situation. Generally a team will announce a basic intention of how many starts or AB a player will get, and then events take their course and plans evolve based on how people play. What’s evident in this case is that (a) if there was a plan, it was either a ridiculous plan or a plan that didn’t get followed, and (b) it also failed to evolve to fit the needs of the team.
Third … let’s not lose sight that what’s unusual about Marte’s situation is precisely that he gets slotted in for zero playing time. Guy makes the roster, basically a rookie, very recently considered an elite prospect, the normal situation is that he’s either getting 4-5 starts a week or (more unusually) at least 2-3.
I think you would have trouble finding even two examples where a prospect with Marte’s resume made a roster with no plan to give him any playing time. That makes this situation either a brilliant innovation or historically retarded.
Pie isn’t a good example.
Yes, the Indians have clearly bollixed the Marte roster situation. It is driven, I think, by necessity and a fear of repeating the Phillips debacle. Desperation, I guess. But obviously no explicit plan. Maybe Shapiro and Wedge figured it would sort itself out—somebody would be injured or a sign would appear in the sky.
Marte’s presence on the roster indicates an implicit plan: keep him from going to another roster. But I would agree that his is a “historically retarded” situation.
I can’t say it any better than I did in that article:
If the plan wasn’t to give Marte playing time in the event of struggles at 1B and 3B and LF and RF and DH … then what the hell was the plan?
As an aside, that article started as a three-paragraph blurb in a Week In Review piece, then I blurted it out into a 15-paragraph rant, not that well thought out, mostly Marte-vs-Blake. At that point, however, I got lots of great feedback in the discussion, and I ended up expanding and rewriting significant parts of it. The result was a much better and more refined argument making the larger point, that when the lineup’s truly global struggles still didn’t get Marte into the mix, it revealed some combination of plan-lessness and a rift between GM and manager.
How has that been different for guys like Choo, Aubrey and Francisco?
In the end, it comes down to daily performances (and sometimes matchups) and rest days.
Those three players were all given consecutive games to get into some sort of rhythm not to mention regular playing time in the minors. Marte has not had any regular playing time. It’s a huge difference
Well, that’s true, but it’s also true that those guys all did something right away, to varying degrees. That’s a big reason why they got additional chances.
Marte certainly hasn’t been given an extended run, but when you’re in his situation you have to show something. Getting worked over by Kenny Rogers with a man on third and one out won’t help your cause. Rogers abused a young player with huge holes.
So you are saying if a young player does not show anything at all in 50 scattered at-bats at age 25, we should determine that either
a.) player is not talented
b.) player should not be getting playing time unti….when?
He’ll get more time once the FO decides we’re out of play-off contention. Given Marte’s circumstances it all makes sense to me. If we were a contender Marte get the Phillips treatment and traded for a single A relief prospect by now.
"the most vehement Yankee-hating guy I know" - Jay
I assume you’re hyperbolizing, but why trade Marte if we’re a contender? Even if you want Blake starting, he provides depth and defense when the organization is lacking at that position. And contenders who play in the same financial league that we do can not afford to toss off cheap commodities for marginal returns, even in playoff seasons.
I think the most likely reason is that a contender doesn’t have the roster space to hold someone who is getting absolutely no playing time. Which leads to my concern, if we were a contender would we ultimately end up dumping Andy without giving him a legit tryout and without getting anything substantial return?
The 2007 Tribe put together the best record in baseball while having at least one roster spot that got no playing time.
Yes, but it was less by design than it just turned out that way through performance. You have to assume the latter will happen in some form, which is why doing the former is stupid.
Of course. I’m simply refuting the statement that a contender “doesn’t have the roster space to hold someone who is getting absolutely on playing time.” It’s not true, but obviously you don’t plan for such a circumstance. And so would a contender trade someone who is not playing at all and has no options? I suppose. Better to adjust playing time, especially if that player has some value.
Lots of times a contender will make a trade when not even struggling to further bolster the team in a weak area. Maximizing the utility of each roster spot goes hand-in-hand with this.
by Jay on Jun 9, 2008 2:03 PM EDT up reply actions
Put down the hyperbole pen, Roger. You seem to get that out when anyone posts a contrarian view on Marte. Yes, of course, it’s obvious 50 at-bats shows he’s not talented.
My point was that in his situation, he has to show something. He’s trying to take at-bats away from Blake, who like him or not, has started for this team the past 5 years and has been serviceable. And if he hasn’t shown anything in the limited chances he’s got. So why is it so tough to understand the reluctance to sit a 5-year starter to give Marte a chance on a team that was one win away from the World Series last year?
Marte’s career line over 4 scattered stretches (350 PA) is .194/.253/.330. That’s unfathomably bad, even when only getting sporadic play.
I’ve posted before that I think Marte should get some more playing time, and the point about moving Blake around or sitting him more is valid. I will also say that it would be really stupid to dump Marte now, and if/when CC gets traded and they wave the white flag, Marte better get the majority of time at 3B.
Look, I don’t mind a contrarian view on a player, in fact I don’t even disagree with you that Marte looks awful in the playing time he has been given. What we are arguing about though is whether or not the scattered time at the major league level is fair to evaluate Marte on. This I will not budge on, you absolutely cannot figure out what you have in the player until given extended playing time. This does not mean that Marte will become a good player, which I think you are assuming is the position that I am taking. It is the exact same situation as Brandon Phillips, we just cannot afford to give up on our top prospects after they struggle early in their careers.
As for Casey Blake, you say serviceable, I say maybe serviceable in his best years, but for the most part well below average. When you look at defense and hitting for the 3B position, Casey Blake just doesn’t cut it. Does the fact that we were one win away from the World Series mean that we shouldn’t look to upgrade at one of our weakest positions?
At no time have I argured that the time he’s been given is fair to evaluate him. I”ve never said that. So if you think that’s what we’re arguing about, it’s not.
I’m interpreting that you seem to feel that he should’ve been given an extended look early this year. I’m not necessarily opposed to that, but I’m trying to make the point that you should be able to understand why it isn’t happening in reality.
They should always look to upgrade…but in my opinion, Marte would be a downgrade in 2008. And I think that’s obviously the opinion of Wedge and probably Shapiro, too. If Marte turns into a decent player, I think it will take time. More time than for a normal prospect, and the numbers he’s had so far in his career back that up.
TribeJay, you know I’m a fan, but you’re showing a real blind spot here.
Marte’s career line over 4 scattered stretches (350 PA) is .194/.253/.330. That’s unfathomably bad, even when only getting sporadic play.
I can hardly count the ways this is wrong.
First, it’s not even that bad — not for a little more than half a season, not for a 22-year-old rookie, which is when Marte had about half those PA. We’ve had plenty of guys who’ve done worse recently on the team — although granted, mostly they’ve been 2B not 3B — and the HOF has more than a few who did worse at the start of their careers. You could easily dig up 50 All-Stars who started worse.
Second, the only thing really wrong with those numbers is the BABIP, which is .228. Normalizing to .305, you get .262 / .315 / .429. I’m not saying we should just go ahead and credit the guy with a 744 OPS, but it is sensible that we treat the effects of an aberrant BABIP with suspicion, and a 744 OPS would be quite good for a 22-year-old rookie.
Third, the Blake comparison again — here’s 351 recent PA from Blake, OPS of 664. Of course, Blake had the benefit of playing every day to get those numbers, with a little offseason wraparound. Has Marte ever had such an opportunity? Yes — but shorter of course. Here’s Marte from a year earlier, basically the only continuous, regular MLB playing time of his career, from his 2006 callup to when he went on the DL in 2007, with an OPS of 678 — and again, this is mostly as a 22-year-old rookie. (The point isn’t that Marte’s number is a little higher than Blake’s, the point is that neither number is particularly bad given only 2-3 months of data.)
If you want to be even slightly intellectually honest about it, you at least separate those 219 PA from the other 131 in which he was playing only sporadically — and put up an OPS of 425. It’s tempting, in fact, to look at this as a reasonable baseline difference between a rookie starting sporadically and a rookie starting 4-6 times a week — 250 points of OPS.
(Side-note to Dave: Note that I am not even doing my usual trick of discounting the first 40-ish PA, Marte’s famous “settling-in” period. I am counting all the PA for the start of both 2006 and 2007.)
The last problem is simply that to extent that Marte went up-and-down a bit between the majors and minors, the numbers aside from 2006 basically just amount to cherrypicking. His struggles in Atlanta (at 21!) were brief clusters of AB, and the rest of the time he was more or less kicking ass in Triple-A (at 21). Yet you want to pick up his 57 PA, ignore everything else he was doing that year, and toss them in the pile with the rest of his PA. Believe me, if I took that kind of liberty with Casey Blake — a bad week here, a bad week there — it would be easy to make him look like the worst hitter ever over 350 PA.
In sum: You got this totally and incredibly wrong.
by Jay on Jun 10, 2008 11:58 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
I was referencing that line more as an explanation of why hasn’t gotten extended playing time from his current manager, not as a reason to indicate he’s not good or never will be good.
I think it’s safe to say that if he had produced more with his at-bats this year (such as drive in a run), he would have had more opportunities to date. Now whether or not that’s the proper approach is surely up for debate, as indicated by this and many other threads.
Finally have a chance to get to the PC for more than 3 minutes, and after reading your post more thoroughly Jay, I have another comment (putting it here so it doesn’t get lost with the below stuff).
Showing a real blind spot…I wasn’t intending to put his career line in context. I wasn’t referring to it as an indicator of why he shouldn’t get playing time, or why it shows he can’t play (neither of which I believe, by the way). Again, I was using it to explain why he hadn’t gotten the same opportunities as guys like Francisco, Choo, and even some extent, Aubrey.
Standing alone, his line is bad. Period. And I can’t see how you can argue that this is “totally and incredibly wrong.”
You put it into context to make your points…most of which I agree with.
I get the clarification, and thank you, but it seems to me that you’re basically saying that the Indians (or Wedge) are somehow less capable of contextualizing the data than you and I are. I find that very hard to believe, even in Wedge’s case. We already know that the Indians track “hard-hit ball average” for every Indians prospect, tracking this as a stat for every game of all their minor league teams. I’m quite sure they are looking at the numbers every day that show how well he’s hit the ball and where, how well he’s worked the count, his success in bunt situations, etc. I’m not even saying those numbers are particularly good, but they’re going to look better for Marte than his raw “results” data.
Basically, I don’t believe Marte’s playing time is suffering due to anything like his low career OPS. I believe the Indians have a far more sophisticated take on the subject, and I believe they are accustomed employing metrics every day that we don’t even have access to, both on offense and on defense. I don’t imagine OPS comes up much at all.
Yes, though I’d probably use “unwilling” instead of “less capable”. And I think you’d find that in most teams that are considered contenders at the beginning of the year, not just the Indians.
I don’t think Wedge gives a flying you-know-what about Marte’s historical “hard-hit” average when making out the lineup for any given night.
I remain convinced that if Marte had done something earlier in the year that he would’ve gotten more AB’s than he has up til now. Not saying he would be the regular, but he would’ve gotten more opportunities.
I think Wedge is a lot more astute with the data than generally might be assumed. I’m not saying he’s looking at Marte’s hard-hit average historically, I’m saying he can look at those numbers for the current season for an overview.
That said, while I’m pretty sure I’m right about that, I think you’re nonetheless right about that last paragraph.
I wouldn’t even bother to disagree with this, but if his swing-plane is screwed up, the lack of consistent playing time can’t be helping.
Maybe I should just defer to TribeJay when discussing Marte. I have agreed totally with his arguments and observations, and he is more succinct than I have been.
But one more remark about his swing plane. It has looked the same to me over the last three years, and I assume it was the same before then. My feeling is that Bobby Cox saw 20 ABs of that swing, and said he didn’t want any part of it.
but then why would we have traded for him? we have scouts too
by Gradyforpresident on Jun 10, 2008 3:42 PM EDT up reply actions
And wouldn’t it hinder him at all levels? If he had that same swing plane back when he was excelling in the minors, it wouldn’t make sense unless it has changed since then
Exactly. I don’t buy the swing plane argument at all. First of all, we haven’t seen enough of him to decide whether it’s a legitimate concern. Secondly, we don’t know how long his swing has been like that…and if it was there when he was raking then it’s not a real problem.
I don’t think the Tribe ever thought they were getting a high-BA guy. His strength is (was) a good walk rate and good power. My best-case scearnio for Marte doesn’t involve him hitting over .260. But if he walks a fair amount and hits for power, then he’ll be a good player.
Best-case is still only .260? That seems a little stretched. I imagine you would be very pleasantly surprised but not astonished if he grew into a .280 hitter.
Maybe I used the term “best-case” a little too loosely. But he never hit over .275 above A-ball, and even then it was .281 and .285. I just don’t like his swing, and his lack of ability to hit the ball hard the other way. I actually did see him line out to right last week (maybe it was Texas?), and almost fell off the couch.
So yes, I’d be surprised if he hit .280, but probably not astonished.
Again, maybe I should only post when I have suffiicient time to really explain my points…my problem, not yours. :)
My use of the term swing plane was very simplistic. I’m not a hitting coach, nor do I claim to be. But it seems to me that his swing isn’t necessarily a “line-drive swing” that will produce a high BA. I’m not an expert in BABIP, so please correct me if I”m wrong. It seems to me that the hitters with higher BA’s tend to have higher BABIP…generally, it seems, by definition.
I also don’t think that it’s “screwed up”...he opens up and has an upper-cut swing. I think his swing will always be that way. Therefore, I think it’s faulty to assume that his BABIP will normalize to .305. It likely will improve from where it is, but I would predict it will be less than normal.
Again, I like BABIP as a tool, but I’m not an expert, or at least not the expert I’d be if this stat had come out 20 years ago. ;)
The only reason it’s a “mess” is because Marte’s play stinks. If he’d just OPS 750 or so there would be no decision. He’d have the job.
"the most vehement Yankee-hating guy I know" - Jay
I don’t think he’d have the full-time job if he’d “just OPS 750.” 750 is not spectacular, and he’d be putting up those not-spectacular numbers in piece-meal playing time at best, so why would Wedge decide to sit his favorite kind of player? At this point it seems that Marte would have to explode for multiple games to get a regular job.
Can we just rename this post ‘Reining in expectations for the 2008 Cleveland Indians”?
Let's Go 2009!
I believe a major part of the “play Marte” campaign at LGT, is that so many of us disdain Blake. If we had a legit third baseman in the final year of his contract, and mgmt made the decision to play the vet at third for 40 games to see if this was our year, few people would disagree with the strategy. We would understand that there are still 120 games left to play Marte a portion of the time if this isn’t our year. So, now Marte is playing a portion of the time and mgmt doesnt intend to give up on him, given our alternatives. No matter how much Andy struggles this year, it will be chalked up to learning curve. Now that Andy is getting playing time, all this expectation stuff should be a non issue.
I find so much to disagree with here, starting with the whole premise of the thread. Who is it that has these high expectations for Marte if he were playing every day this season? There has been a steady drumbeat of demanding playing time for him — I was promoting the concept, and Mario was leading the drumbeat. At some point, weeks ago, it got way over the top, I think (and hope) in part because you couldn’t tell the serious anger from the mock anger from “I’m just saying this because it’s apparently what people say here.”
Whatever. But even amid that dubious drumbeat, I don’t remember anyone ever claiming Marte was going to put up great or even very good numbers, maybe not even “good” numbers. I think the basic consensus has been: “I think Marte has a very good chance to put up at least decent numbers this season, while being significantly less atrocious around the bag than Blake.” The PECOTA weighted mean line in the original post:
.737 OPS and an EqA of .257
That is basically my expectation — not a reigned-in one, the original one — and to be honest, I’d be relieved if he actually did that given an extended shot. As said extended shot has not materialized — he recently got five starts in seven games, but other than that he hasn’t started more than twice in any week — so the clock hasn’t really started yet.
Honestly, its not anyone in peticular on here, but the people that post on here aren’t the only people that visit and consume something from this site, so to simply ask who on here has misguidedly high expectations for Marte that would then lead me to write this fanpost is pointless. It was enough for me to hear Hamilton harping on the kid for not having any RBIs thus far this season (in a recent broadcast) in addition to any casual fan who’s been around since Marte was acquired for the beloved Coco Crisp who had been told by the media/team etc that they thought Marte would be our 3B of the future and a potential All-Star caliber one at that, to spend some time discussing the what would be reasonable expectations for him in a rookie season. So if this came off as some sort of lecture to any of the posters on this site, it certainly wasn’t meant to be.
And yes, I recall you specifically talking about Marte’s PECOTA projection prior to the season and thinking that it would about what should expect out of him this year and be “ok” with it. I believed the same thing at that time as well. There’s no underlying motive to this post, I think I was pretty clear in stating that I did not want to get into a huge should Marte play vs. not playing. He should play (for reason’s already established in your post on that subject plus other reasons) and I felt it was fair to revisit what many of the projection systems thought he would do given the chance to play this season, while highlighting the variability in what we could expect out of a rookie player. I know this is old hat for you and for just about everyone who posts here, but once again, there are others who visit this site and/or others who are just getting into the type of indepth analysis of this team that is presented pretty much only on this site as opposed to cleveland.com or local radio show.
For what its worth, my original plan was to do a write up about how J. Guthrie is better than CC and how Shapiro blundered again just like with that phillips guy, but I figured someone else would write a fanpost about that since its such an interesting topic.
Anybody want to start a pool on guessing the date of Marte’s first RBI in 08? Between Wedge not playing Marte, Wedge pulling Marte in RBI situations, and, of course, Marte’s atrocious hitting, it may still be a long time.
I’m voting for a solo HR in Colorado on Jun 19th.
Some other stuff to object to. I’ve already debunked the “hot start” theory, also known as the “he has to show something” theory. I don’t think I’ve ever seen a dumber idea on LGT that was promoted by more than one person. I’ll give debunking it one last try.
Here’s the original:
This stuff about how one "makes an impression" is just foolishness. At best, it expresses an intolerance for different types of players that is akin to what I’m criticizing with Wedge. Some players start hot but fade quickly, others start cold but thrive later on. See also: how awful Francisco was after his first 20 PA last season. See also: Shane Spencer’s post-rookie career.There is nothing especially better about players who tend to "start hot." And as with the personality issues, no matter how widespread that tendency might be even at this highest level, it’s still stupid, and we can’t afford stupidity.
Since then, Francisco has provided us with more fuel for the debunking. First, he started off the season in Buffalo with a full month of 623 OPS — was he on his way to matching Marte’s third-time-around-and-injured mark of 766 for the season? Maybe. He’d have had to put up an 800+ OPS the rest of the way just to raise his season total to 766, so who knows?
Now, given that he “didn’t show anything” in Buffalo, we can expect him to be lousy in the majors — after all, now he’s “getting worse with age” like Marte, right? Wrong — of course that’s wrong. He gets called up (a second time) and explodes like a shot, just like last year — even though his Buffalo numbers were much worse than last year, he basically starts off in the majors the same. Better, even, because he keeps his hot start going — 1000+ OPS over his first three weeks! Awright!!!! Obviously he’s a star because of this HOT START!!!!!!
Wrong — of course that’s wrong. Over the next two weeks, Francisco has a 636 OPS. Of course he’s not terrible now, but he is just going through the wild swings of a rookie — someone who pretty clearly is good enough to be here but will have to make adjustments along the way in order to succeed long-term. This is a good thing, i.e., a normal thing for a good rookie.
Francisco’s 2008 season debunks so many things I can’t even keep track. It shows the “hot start” idea is dumb (which should have been obvious already). It shows the “slow start” idea is dumb, too. It supports ignoring small samples and gets us back to “repetition myopia,” where a player loses focus in his third season of Triple-A, with Francisco seemingly about to join the ranks of Garko, Marte and Phillips, struggling in the minors while being a perfectly good major league hitter.
There’s more, but I’ll hit POST now.
Jay, it ain’t fair that players are expected to “show something,” and it isn’t prudent or wise, but that’s the way nonquantitative managers think. I vaguely remember Bill James writing back at the dawn of time about guys who had a limited shot to make it as a regular, never really getting a significant number of at-bats before being assigned as marginal, fourth-outfielder types. These sorts of decisions are hasty, ill-informed and illogical, but that’s the way it often is.
Hot start is a dumb idea, but it’s the prevailing one in MLB, and has been for many years. Jay Bruce has earned himself a position on the Reds roster for the rest of the season, not (I think) because of what he did for the Louisville Bats, but because he hit like crazy his first week in the big leagues. Maybe, once the Reds started the arbitration clock on him he was up for good, but if he went 0-25 would Dusty Baker play him? Would there not be calls, however irrational, to send him back down to AAA?
Okay, last point. And it’s a tricky one.
The point is: SCREW ANDY MARTE.
And what I mean by this is, this has nothing to do with what Marte deserves. I am not even that big of a fan of the guy — and why should I be? With the Indians, he’s always known what the manager wants out of him, but until this regular season, he hasn’t seemed to exert any extra effort delivering it. No doubt he has brought some of this crap on himself by not doing all the little things, and yes, including just to impress his manager. But you know, those complaints only go so far with me, and that’s why I’ve sort of lumped in the Marte sitting with Peralta’s benching a few weeks ago — at some point, we have to remember that intangibles are not tangibles, but let’s be honest, on the intangibles, Marte hasn’t given us much to cheer about.
And I know, right now everyone is like, WTF, how are you not a Marte fan? But it’s true, I’m not. I’m not that optimistic about him, and I don’t like how he’s conducted himself. And if he struggled too hard to impress his new org in 2006, I’m not mad, but it’s not a good thing. Starting 2007 by booting the ball around the infield more than a couple times? Not great. A little injury-prone, not a good thing. Did he mope a bit in 2007 after being sent down, lose his focus? Again, it’s understandable, but it’s not a good thing — a good thing would be going on a mad-crazy tear after being sent down, like Crisp did. And then 2008 spring training, showing up a little out of shape, pulling a couple of olés. He hasn’t made it easy to like him.
So I am not a Marte fan, and I’m damned sure not telling you to be a Marte fan. I am an Indians fan, and I want them to be doing smart things and not squandering assets — and I will certainly tell all of you, you should want those things, too.
Underlying all of this “Marte has to show something” talk is a strong thread of making him “earn it” — we’ll try it as “MHEI” — and you can tell that this moralistic element is in the mix, because from a pure analytical standpoint, this talk is completely retarded. I am also a fan of MHEI. A big fan, in fact, and I’ve talked about it a lot with Garko, Francisco, etc. But MHEI is not the end, it’s the means. The end is that we have the best team possible. Generally MHEI is the best way to do that from a standpoint of getting prospects from Triple-A to the majors. But it is still just the means — an operating principle — not the goal.
The problem is, the clock has run out on MHEI and while it would be nice if Marte had earned it before the clock ran out, it was only partly his fault that it didn’t happen. Three problems with MHEI in this situation.
- He already earned it, with stellar play in the minors 2002-2005 and a solid 2006 debut as a 22-year-old rookie.
- He did nothing to un-earn it, as he essentially lost his job by going on the DL and was never offered it back, while a half-dozen decidedly non-All-Star players got playing time instead.
- Even if you actually believe — against all evidence — that he did un-earn it, he has no real way to earn it back.
He is simply not the kind of player who is going to excel by sitting for a while, then getting all hyper-adrenalized when he gets his chance to play — God bless those guys, but Andy ain’t one of them, and I’ll say it again, seeing that as a reasonable way to dole out playing time is completely retarded, e.g., totally contrary we everything we know from 100+ years of recorded baseball.
And here we get to the main problem: It isn’t about what Marte deserves, it’s about having the best team — short-term and long-term. I hope I don’t have to rehash how valuable Marte could be if he were just an average 3B for the next five years, but anyway, it’s real valuable. The difference between Marte and Blake this season is, in my view, pretty marginal, all things considered, and if you abstract it out to the difference between Marte whoever-loses-AB-at-five-positions — Michael Aubrey? Seriously? — the difference shrinks further.
The strategic significance of not playing him this year, however, is far from marginal. It tells us what we need to be doing in the offseason, and ideally, it gets him to a more experienced level as a big-league hitter for 2009. The alternative is that we’re flying blind in the offseason, and Marte doesn’t get an extra 300-400 reps at a key developmental stage and ends up, optimistically, in the same place to start 2009 as he was in 2007.
That’s potentially a huge long-term sacrifice, and the marginal difference between Marte and Blake-and/or-whoever in 2008 was not worth it, is not worth it, was never worth it.
So I don’t care if he hasn’t “showed Wedge something” — it’s not about Marte showing us something over a handful of AB, and it never was. It’s about the team doing the smart thing, not under-valuing Marte as a potential long-term asset, and not over-valuing Blake as a short-term asset. If Marte is no good, then let’s get rid of him — regardless of what he’s “earned.” I couldn’t care less about Andy Marte — who needs this kind of grief? But the problem is and always has been, we don’t really know if he’s no good. Even if you think there’s plenty of evidence he’s no good, I’ve got plenty of evidence that he isn’t no good, and given the magnitude of the risk of losing him if he isn’t no good, the risk of playing him if he is no good is trivial.
Really terrible ending, but I’m done.
by Jay on Jun 10, 2008 12:35 PM EDT reply actions 2 recs
This is good. We can get down to my difference with your position. My assumption is that Marte’s audition runs through 09. Why? Shapiro knows that even if Marte plays miserably this year, we don’t have affordable alternatives positioned to do anything about it. Given budget restrictions and the high price of third basemen, Marte will be at third in 09. Maybe we have something more in 2010, but we know a lot more about 09. No matter how well Marte plays now, it won’t save him from a putrid 09. No matter how badly he plays now, he still plays third in 09. So, though your points are valid, there is no real sense of urgency to get him off the bench. In fact, it’s easier to sell the fans on Marte in 09 if there is less evidence that he sucked in 08 with an extended tryout.
All that stuff about showing Wedge something is just our guessing why Wedge wouldn’t play Andy at third. It’s not LGT members who think that’s a grand idea.
First off, I think Marte is still a prospect based on his age and performance in the minors prior to being traded away from Atlanta. If you think he no longer has the potential to be a good player than I understand your point that he’ll just get his shot next season not this season. But I wonder how much damage a full season of riding the bench with little consistent playing time against competition will be on a prospects development.
These are all very fine considerations for teams that can afford to pay for such luxuries. All we can afford is to plug a warm body in at third who’s resume suggests significant upside and hope for the best. And then they polish up that turd of a limited alternative so the fans in Cleveland think it’s worth buying tickets to see. And while we fool ourselves into thinking we have a fighting chance, executives in NY are already planning 09 around a rotation that includes CC and laughing all the way to the bank. Baseball is a business that is broken to the smaller market fans, but works just great for the people running the business. Yes, I willingly participate in an activity for which I am a dupe. The difference is that I never forget my place in the order of things. And I believe Marte is being used as a pawn in the marketing of the Indians. Sure, the Indians would like to win games in the short term, but maintaining credibility with the paying fan is what drives the money machine.
If you aren’t careful, you could become as cynical as me when you reach my age.
I can’t agree with any of this. Credibility with the paying fan is exactly 98% about winning, and the remaining 2% rests on players and factors much more interesting to casual fans that Andy Marte.
And like Hans, I think that the extent of his playing time in ‘08 can definitely be a factor is his ‘09 performance.
Also! Let’s not get to carried away with our pitiful budget. OK, we’re not signing Viciedo. And we are certainly still entertaining the idea of Marte in ‘09. But it’s not Marte or else empty space. Or even Marte or else Andy Gonzalez. We would trade (Barfield) or sign (Dellucci) someone else. It’s not likely to be a star, that’s all. The position is just being kept warm for Diaz anyway.
As APV pointed out: in the DSL.
No idea on the visa situation. But that only really matters if you’re a racist who cares about the Cleveland Indians over the DSL Indians.
by dgcambridge on Jun 11, 2008 12:39 PM EDT up reply actions
Marte is the ultimate chicken or the egg argument.
Marte sucks
Marte sucks because he doesn’t get playing time
Because Marte sucks
Because he doesn’t get consistent playing time
Because he sucks
If this is the Marte-Blake let it all hang out thread, I’ve got a doozy for you: I love Casey Blake.
You have to take a step back to realize what a great story Casey Blake is. Have you ever seen this?
Drafted: Selected by Philadelphia Phillies in 11th Round (305th overall) of 1992 amateur entry draft (June-Reg) ... Selected by New York Yankees in 45th Round (1259th overall) of 1995 amateur entry draft (June-Reg) ... Selected by Toronto Blue Jays in 7th Round (189th overall) of 1996 amateur entry draft (June-Reg)
Transactions: [Jun 6,1996] – signed [May 23,2000] – Claimed on waivers by Twins from Blue Jays. [Sep 21,2001] – Claimed on waivers by Orioles from Twins. [Oct 12,2001] – Claimed on waivers by Twins from Orioles. [Oct 14,2002] – Released by Twins. [Dec 18,2002] – Signed as Free Agent by Indians. [Jan 21,2005] – Signed by Indians (2-years + club option) [Feb 1,2008] – Signed by Indians (1-year)
Just so we’re up to date here, that little timeline means that when Casey came to the Indians in 2002, he was a 28 year old with 125 ML plate appearances for three different franchises. He had been perpetually blocked by more established players, but always hit too well to stay in the minors. (Casey’s career minor league line: .292/.363/.469.)
And it’s not as if Casey’s been handed the golden key to the city in Cleveland. Here’s Ryan’s Casey Blake player profile from 2006:
Blake held onto the third base job, providing the young Indians team with affordable production through the 2003 and 2004 season. He hit .271/.354/.486 in 2004, and signed a multi-year that winter. He moved to the outfield the following season to make room for Aaron Boone, and while Boone didn’t work, Blake’s position change did. Casey’s defense at the hot corner took a nosedive in 2004, and even though his bat was nonexistant during the 2005 season, he was a much better defensive player in the outfield.
The story, of course, goes on. Casey endured multiple position changes and personal life issues. He’s made no excuses, always been a good quote, supported his teammates, and in general shown nothing but loyalty to the organization which rewarded his tenacity.
And that brings up something important: Loyalty’s a two-way street. Somebody in that front office said, “Well, shoot, I wonder if we can make a major leaguer out of this guy?” To the Indians’ continuing credit, they kept playing Casey, through injuries and bad spells and worse. They rescued him from AAAA and made him a multi-millionaire. This loyalty ledger, I think it’s zeroed out.
Which is why Casey playing right now puzzles me so. I won’t try to elaborate further on Jay’s points about the strategic implications of getting Marte some ABs. I couldn’t if I tried, for one thing, but primarily I’m coming at this from a less logical perspective anyway.
Andy Marte is awesome.
We can type our fingers off about his swing plane and his fitness level and his worth ethic and his approach and we will be left with lots of text and that same bemused expression on our faces. Because, well, have you looked at this recently?
.275/.372/.506, 20 HR in 462 PA, 64:83 BB:K
That’s Andy, in AAA Richmond, as a 21-year-old. If you’re about to respond to that with any sentence starting with, “Yeah, but…”, hang on a sec. Look at it. 500 SLG! 21 years old! AAA! I’m looking around. From a purely offensive standpoint, I can’t find a guy on the Indians’ 40-man - hell, in the organization, top to bottom - who even sniffed that batting line at that age. Jhonny Peralta came close, a year older (but still very young, which we would be well-served to remember). Victor Martinez may have managed it if he had spent any significant time in Buffalo. And, what’s-his-face, that Brandon Phillips guy, he reasonably approximated it, with much less discipline. Anyway, the point is that these are to a man productive major leaguers, if not stars, and Andy compares favorably to all of them in raw offensive talent.
We didn’t get to see it, of course. Our opportunities physically to see Andy succeed have been far and few between. I got to watch some video of him dropping a couple of baseballs onto Washington Ave. in last year’s I-League HR Derby in Toledo, but that’s about it. So I guess it’s understandable if we’re left shrugging.
You know who did get to see Andy be awesome, though? The Indians. And that’s where I keep running out of answers about this. This same organization, the one that could take the 28 year old cast-off third-baseman and say, I think we’ve got something here, let’s keep him going—these guys don’t know what to do with arguably the most pedigreed hitter on their roster? For serious?
And that cast-off third baseman, that’s the guy we’re benching Andy in favor of? Like I said, loyalty doesn’t explain it, not any more, at least not rationally. The Indians have stood by Casey Blake at their considerable expense, and to his massive benefit. Casey’s struggling to slug 400. Check out his PA/HR:
2004: 23.9
2005: 25.3
2006: 24
2007: 36.8
2008: 36.5
His defense was average at best in his prime, and this isn’t his prime. The Indians had no qualms about reducing Aaron Boone to a bench role (and he’s actually been pretty decent at it since he left) under fairly similar circumstances.
I’m not really disagreeing with you, hans, at least not directly. I have no idea what we should expect from Andy Marte this season, if he plays. But I refuse to temper my hopes for what he could be eventually based on two years’ of data riddled with injuries and qualifiers, and I refuse to believe that the Indians are a noticeably better baseball team by starting Blake than by starting Marte. As Jay said, “Try to imagine 2007 was Marte’s first season in Triple-A — 766 OPS, 23-year-old third baseman, it’s actually pretty good. But of course, his actual first season in Triple-A was at age 21.” To my mind, he’s every bit the potential answer he was when we traded for him.
I love Casey Blake. But enough is enough.
by fleerdon on Jun 11, 2008 1:03 PM EDT reply actions 3 recs
Ah, Tyler, you take me way back to the day of the trade …
Marte is the most advanced hitter at his age that the Indians have had since Manny Ramirez in 1991. Like Ramirez, Marte prospered at Triple-A at age 21, and like Ramirez, Marte stumbled in a brief major-league callup of less than 60 at bats. Indians like Jim Thome, Grady Sizemore and Jhonny Peralta did not reach this level until a year later, and players such as Crisp, Victor Martinez and Travis Hafner didn’t reach it for several more years. Marte does not have the prodigious knack for pure contact hitting that Ramirez had, but he does show a similar profile for power hitting and plate discipline—both traits that tend to project well from Triple-A to the majors.[dot dot dot]
Just 84 days older, Marte’s career in many ways represents the most optimistic projections we might have had for Whitney. After a mediocre Rookie-ball debut at age 17, Marte turned in strong performances in low-A at age 18, in high-A at age 19, in Double-A at age 20, and finally in Triple-A at age 21. Facing older competition at every level, Marte put up a consistent profile as a hitter: solid contact, excellent power and outstanding plate discipline. His rise through the minors has been so steady and unyielding as to almost be boring. He did miss time at the start of 2004 with a strained ankle, but he returned to hit 24 HR in less than 400 AB, a performance similar to Peralta’s in Akron in 2002, at the same age—only a little better.
Over the last three seasons, Marte has put up an average line of .278/.370/.500 …
Geez, he sounds incredible! What the hell happened to that guy?
At first I read that as if you were saying Marte couldn’t field his position and those three could. I had flashbacks of Thome throwing balls into the stands and almsot killing someone.
Don’t know if anyone will get the reference.
by Gradyforpresident on Jun 11, 2008 3:05 PM EDT up reply actions
Yeah I wanted to make it a point that I only wanted to address what we could expect out of Marte for this season only. I much like you think that he’s going to turn into a fine player and will have a better chance at exploding on the scene following this year…......but I’m also concerned that the lack of playing time will hinder his development and then we can all point to this season of bench warming and batting practice as being a big reason why this kid was ruined by the Indians.
Yeah, and I’m just sick of that stuff. I’m sick of having reasons why the kid hasn’t performed. They keep him in the minors for service time, then he’s hurt, then they give his job to Casey Blake on the strength of a hot week, then he mopes around Buffalo, and now he’s on the bench. Just once I’d like to be able to say, the kid a great opportunity, and either (a) he couldn’t make it happen or (b) he made it happen. It’s just one more season full of moves that can only shrink our ROI on this kid. Drives me nuts.
I think fleardon captures it pretty well when looking at the treatment Blake is receiving this year vs. Marte. For an organization that looked like it had a knack for seeing the “big picture” as opposed to the “win at all costs for a year” (much like the Tigers did this offseason) approach, this whole Blake/Marte thing (at no fault to Blake that is, he could have gotten playing time at other positions, had they asked him to in spring training) seems to fly in the face of that approach. Its such a contradiction. Either go all out and sacrafice some of the prospects to bolster this team for the playoffs, or be consistent in developing those prospects (which sitting on the bench is not).
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
Featured Stories
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- The Citi Field All-Star game has finally been made official for 2013
- Brett Lawrie receives four-game suspension, fined for ‘aggressive actions’ toward umpire
- PNC Park security guard loses finger in struggle with fan during Pirates game
- Create-a-Caption: Partying like it’s 1988
- The Ron Washington puppet is watching you while you sleep — and has possibly jinxed the Rangers
