Casey Blake
Hi guys, I'm a Rays fan (as the name implies), and I have some questions about Casey Blake and his situation with the Indians.
First, I noticed a post talking about Blake possibly being a Type A free agent. However, do you think it is likely that Blake would accept an offer of arbitration? He makes $6.1 million this year, and would likely make at least that much if he went to arbitration. I just can't see him getting $6.5-7 million per year on the open market.
Second, what type of return do you guys think Shapiro would be looking for for Blake? Would it be mostly a salary dump/roster space move, with a couple of low-mid level prospects, or would Shapiro try to get a really solid prospect?
Third, I don't know much about Blake other than his offensive stats. How is his defense, especially in RF? And how is he regarded as a teammate/clubhouse presence?
Thanks in advance!
0 recs |
168 comments
Comments
I’ll second that.
More to your point, though: Blake will probably be looking for a deal of at least a couple years, so it is possible, but not likely, that he would accept arbitration. As far as what the Indians would expect in return, the consensus around here, at least, is that we should receive at least a decent prospect for him. It is not likely that it would be a salary dump. Blake is average to above-average in right, mostly because he has a pretty good arm for the position. He is regarded by the Indians as a great clubhouse guy, as well.
by bewwolv on Jul 19, 2008 11:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Better than that, the Indians probably would be willing to pay Blake’s whole salary for the rest of the season, as long as the prospect we’re getting back is legit.
by Jay on Jul 19, 2008 11:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Didn’t mean to infringe on you right of response, Jay, this being your blog and all.
Agreed on the Indians paying the deal though, this has been their M.O. in the past, to make sure that they get a decent prospect back.
by bewwolv on Jul 19, 2008 11:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Blake could easily get a $6 million deal on the open market, if he were willing to take a one-year deal.
What he’ll actually do is hold out for a three-year deal in the range of $16 million, possibly more. While that would be a lower average annual salary than just accepting arbitration, his agent no doubt will advise him that at his age, he should go for the deal with the highest guaranteed total.
I do not think he would accept arbitration from the Rays. There is a small but significant chance he would accept it from the Indians, his team since 2003.
by Jay on Jul 19, 2008 11:32 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
If you do go get Casey Blake, you’ll be getting one of the finest major leaguers in the game today. I consider myself to be one of his biggest fans, and have led the drumbeat all season to have him starting in favour of Marte. He’s exactly the type of versatile, hard-working and clutch guys that you need to succeed in the playoffs.
His offensive prowess in unquestioned. You can see it in his stats. Around here we call him LOBlake, because quite frankly at the end of the day you won’t see many LOB beside Blake’s name. Defensively, he plays a pretty solid third base. A vacuum if you will. His range has really gotten better with age and he’s got an absolute cannon in right. There’s a chance he would be in centerfield if Grady weren’t blocking him.
Bottom line, we would be expecting some sort of midlevel prospect, but rest assured that it would still be a steal.
by supermarioelia on Jul 19, 2008 11:42 PM EDT reply actions 10 recs
ssssssshhhhhh…..all of you stop with your blasted recs, i’m negotiating here
by supermarioelia on Jul 19, 2008 11:56 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
ya that was awesome.
Dear Mr. Sabean, I hear you have a reputation of being stupid. Want to deal Lincecum or Cain? You can pick THREE of these 4 players for either: Borowski, Dellucci, Blake, Byrd.
by westbrook on Jul 20, 2008 12:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I laughed at this for a solid 10 seconds.
Dear Mr. Sabean, I hear you have a reputation of being stupid. Want to deal Lincecum or Cain? You can pick THREE of these 4 players for either: Borowski, Dellucci, Blake, Byrd.
by westbrook on Jul 20, 2008 12:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
This is the best thing that’s happened all day.
I’m having a pretty bad day, but even so. That was spectacular.
Il faut d'abord durer.
by CU Adam on Jul 20, 2008 7:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hmmm…a midlevel prospect? I think we’ve got a few of those that aren’t doing us a whole lot of good right now, especially pitching, like James Houser (AA), Heath Rollins (A+), and Alex Cobb (A). I would love to see the Rays work a deal for Blake.
To be fair and honest, I’m probably in the minority of Rays fans for wanting Blake. Most want Bay, Holliday, or Nady, but all of those guys scare me for one reason or another. Holliday has atrocious home/road splits, Nady is having a career year which I don’t think he can sustain, and Bay would cost a ton in prospects. The only guy I think would be better than Blake is Jayson Werth, but the Phils are in contention, so that may not be as doable.
by raysrule07 on Jul 19, 2008 11:52 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
blake you would be getting for depth and flexibility. stating the obvious, those other guys would provide something very different and cost a heck of a lot more.
by Brick. on Jul 19, 2008 11:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
We were pretty obsessed with the dazzling bauble that is Jason Bay for a while.
by afh4 on Jul 19, 2008 11:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
First, the arb stuff is going to be answered accurately by Jay. But, no, I don’t think he’ll take arbitration from the Rays. He can easily make that much on the open market; Mike Lowell is making 12 million a year and Blake and Lowell are more similar than most people would think at this point in their careers. Plus, Lowell’s deal is going to be a couple of years old. Casey will get a mini-Lowell deal I’d think, probably some like 3/24.
I think he’d take arbitration from the Indians. This is an argument Jay has made persuasively; certain types of players will do it in gratitude to their teams, going to arbitration, then leaving for FA. It gives the team a draft pick at no cost.
Second, what type of return do you guys think Shapiro would be looking for for Blake? Would it be mostly a salary dump/roster space move, with a couple of low-mid level prospects, or would Shapiro try to get a really solid prospect?
If he’s trading, Shapiro is going to the table with a big sign that says “Casey Blake, Free!” The Indians are going to eat his remaining salary in order to maximize return. This has been Dolan and Shap’s MO for a while. It’s not going to be a salary dump or roster clearing. Casey Blake is useful; in fact, right now he’s probably more useful than he’s ever been.
So, I think you’re looking at a David Price or Wade Davis type.
Zing! Kidding.
In all seriousness, your comp deals are the Broussard and Perez trades from 2006, suped up a little bit. Shapiro is a good trading partner in that he tends to be involved in deals that allow other teams to deal from a position of strength. This was on display with the CC situation-Milwaukee just has too many hitters to use and we took some.
For the Ray, your depth is obviously in pitching as well as a bit in CF and C. We don’t want any more outfielders and we’re alright at catcher.
I think the list is going to look something like this and I would look for a deal that involves a huge ceiling guy who’s under 20 and a guy who’s a little more advanced but not all that good:
Eduardo Morlan
Jeremy Hellickson
Alex Cobb
Nick Barnese
Heath Rollins
James Houser
Mitch Talbot
Glenn Gibson
Chris Mason
I would want to see a player like Hellickson, Houser or Morlan as the centerpiece but that might be a little ambitious. I think more likely is something like Talbot or Mason, both of whom the sheen is probably off and aren’t really needed with Price, McGee, and Davis so close, and then one of Cobb, Barnese, or Rollins. We sort of have a thing for depth starters.
I could see them doing Hellickson, Houser, or Morlan straight up.
Third, I don’t know much about Blake other than his offensive stats. How is his defense, especially in RF? And how is he regarded as a teammate/clubhouse presence?
His defense is fine all over the diamond and not great anywhere. He’s considered a superior athlete. His weakest defense is, I think at 3B. He hits well, especially this year. He has a big beard, which people tend to associate with leadership.
by afh4 on Jul 19, 2008 11:57 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
i too think the (center)piece we’d look for from the rays would be pitching.
by Brick. on Jul 20, 2008 12:03 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hellickson isn’t going to happen, at least not for Blake. BA ranked him #22 on their midseason prospects list, right behind Wade Davis. The rest of those guys you mentioned would definitely all be in play. I would do Houser straight up, and I think Friedman would as well. There is no reason for him to still be in AA. I could also see a deal of Cobb and a AAA reliever such as Chris Mason, Nick Debarr, or Dale Thayer.
I love playing GM, but point is, Andrew Friedman has done a good job in trades so far, and Shapiro seems like a reasonable GM (have you seen the Rockies’ demands for Holliday? Yikes!), so I am confident that if the Rays decide that Blake is the best option, something will get done that benefits both sides.
by raysrule07 on Jul 20, 2008 1:30 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Let’s do Hellickson. That K to walk is the sex.
by Joe. on Jul 20, 2008 10:18 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I happen to think he’s better in RF than at 3B. In RF, he has a very good arm that and you won’t have to worry about all the balls that get between him and our slow-ass fat power-hitting shortstop Jhonny Peralta. I happened to like Blake when he was an outfielder. Last year, I hated him… and this year, I can’t say I’d be 100% thrilled with unloading him.
For your case, Mr. Rays Fan, hope you get the good and not the bad.
Dear Mr. Sabean, I hear you have a reputation of being stupid. Want to deal Lincecum or Cain? You can pick THREE of these 4 players for either: Borowski, Dellucci, Blake, Byrd.
by westbrook on Jul 20, 2008 12:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
While your expression of this is a tad bit overly dramatic, it is true that Blake grades out as a mediocre defensive 3B, above average at 1B, and far above average in RF.
by Jay on Jul 20, 2008 10:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
He has a big beard, which people tend to associate with leadership.
lol
One of these days... bang, zoom, straight to the moon...
by mixmasterasia on Jul 20, 2008 7:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think I speak for all of Casey’s fans when I say that the Rays would be getting a guy who has blossomed this year into the kind of clutch hitter that he was projected to be. It would be a thrill for all of us to see Casey lead the Rays into and through the playoffs. You would be getting a clubhouse presence and a player who can play 6 positions. If Shapiro agreed to pay the balance of Casey’s salary, it would make the Rays transition entirely painless as he would not be asking for a major league player in return.
by elsandito on Jul 20, 2008 3:04 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
The fact is that, right now, Casey Blake is no worse than the forth worst Indian on the field. Without Blake the Indians this year would be truly in the tank.
Resident LGT beer kinda sewer
by mauichuck on Jul 21, 2008 7:12 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Geez, it’s early! Worst shouldda read best. Blake is no worse than the fourth best player on the field. Oy!
Resident LGT beer kinda sewer
by mauichuck on Jul 21, 2008 8:45 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Chuck … the Indians this year are truly in the tank.
Blake has had a great year, but that great year has been worth only two marginal wins for the Indians compared to a replacement player — 6 win shares above bench, 18 VORP. So instead of having the sixth-worst record, 43-54, we’d have the fifth-worst record, 41-56, and instead of a +9 run differential, we’d have a -9 run differential.
by Jay on Jul 21, 2008 11:01 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
But we’d have less grit. And a whole lot less to talk about.
by FredOx on Jul 21, 2008 11:11 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
OK, then tell me: who’s are the players that are better then Casey?
Resident LGT beer kinda sewer
by mauichuck on Jul 21, 2008 11:14 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Chuck, is anyone arguing with your “fourth best Indian on the field” assertion? Among position players, you may even be undervaluing him. The point is that the team needs more production generally, and by selling high on Blake, you may get it (for 2009 or 2010). Further, is Casey really likely to maintain production in 2009 at age 35 or 2010 at age 36? Note to the other 29 MLB FOs: the answer to that latter question is “yes, of course.”
by FredOx on Jul 21, 2008 11:21 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Where did I say there were any players better than Casey?
by Jay on Jul 21, 2008 11:53 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’m just a little tired of the snide remarks about Blake’s ability. Yeah he’s got a beard, yeah he’s white and gritty and yeah there are better defensive third baseman. But damn it, he’s one of ours. We should be touting the players he have instead of pining for guys who’ve left.
BTW, I wanna be around when CC strikes Grady out with two on and two out in the ninth inning with the Tribe down by a run and CC does his little Joba/Papelbon fist pump thing. I’ll be interested in the reaction here.
Resident LGT beer kinda sewer
by mauichuck on Jul 21, 2008 12:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
So we’re not supposed to criticize any Indians player, ever? We’re supposed to think that all baseball players instantly become great once they put on their Cleveland uniform? And, of course, they’re terrible and must be hated once they leave.
The Indians are going nowhere this year whether Casey Blake is here or not. Will it really make you feel better if we finish with 76 wins instead of 74? Our goal this year should be to see what players we have that will contribute next year and what we need to change in the offseason. If we can trade Casey for a young player who may be part of our future, what would possibly be wrong with that? As with CC, he’s a free agent at the end of the year, so if he wants to play in Cleveland he can resign with us in the offseason. If Shapiro thinks Casey is a valuable player who can help the Indians he will try to resign him. Trading him now doesn’t change that.
by Buckeye Brad on Jul 21, 2008 1:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
In our zeal to suggest ways to improve our team, we have shoveled a high volume of snide remarks in Casey’s direction. Chuck is a rah rah kinda guy. Don’t hurt his feelings by bashing Casey.
by elsandito on Jul 21, 2008 1:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It’s not the bashing that bothers me. I defy you to find a guy with a more negative view of Hafner than me. It’s the herd mentality/groupthink once again. I’m rah-rah about the Indians as a team but try to be realistic about the players as individuals. In the end I wonder about the group’s ability to evaluate baseball players at all when I read all of this crap about Blake.
And Brad I’ll tell you what, if CC signs with the Indians anytime in the next three years I’ll get you 50 yard line seats at the next OSU/Michigan game. If he doesn’t you owe me a Pastrami sammich from Slyman’s. How do you like those odds?
Resident LGT beer kinda sewer
by mauichuck on Jul 21, 2008 1:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why don’t I get any credit for saying such nice things about Casey?
by afh4 on Jul 21, 2008 3:16 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Uhh, I never said that CC would sign with Cleveland in the offseason. All I said was that he could if he wanted to. That doesn’t mean I think that he will.
But I’ll gladly take you up on that offer. After all, a Pastrami sammich from Slyman’s can’t cost that much…..can it?
by Buckeye Brad on Jul 21, 2008 3:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think the majority of the groupthink/herd mentality is not so much “Casey must go,” but more so “Marte must play.” In a lost season decisions have to be made, and it’s been frustrating to wait so long for the FO and Wedge to realize what needs to be done. Maybe Casey was an inadvertent lightning rod for this, but it was more the situation than the player.
And now we find ourselves with a respectable player on a one year contract. He can bring back value that helps us outside of this lost season. It absolutely makes sense to trade him, which leads from subconscious “Casey must go” chants to tangible ones. But again, it’s nothing against Casey.
Casey is what he is: A slightly above-average offensive player. On defense, he is a jack of all trades and a master of none.
I wish we didn’t disagree so much, Chuck. You and I seem pretty similar. I love this city and I respect the blue-collar residents. I hate the Yankees and I could really go for a Pastrami from Slyman’s.
Steel Nick
by nickjs21 on Jul 21, 2008 7:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That’s a good point — Chuck and possibly others might be conflating the two things.
Earlier in the season, the prevailing view was that Blake was a declining mediocrity — so many of us would have preferred to see him make way for an extended Marte audition. (If Blake was any good at 3B at all, we would never have traded for Marte.) Not necessarily “make way” off the roster, but at least off of 3B.
As the season wore on, Blake put together a really nice season — but the rest of the team didn’t. So now we talk about trading him not so much to get out of the way, but because trading all veterans in their walk year is what you do when your season’s in the tank.
I mean, a team would have to be stupid not to trade their walk year guys at a moment like this, and the Indians aren’t stupid. When this happened in 2002, we traded every veteran who wasn’t either injured (Burks) or intending to veto a trade (Vizquel, Thome).
by Jay on Jul 21, 2008 7:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
So we’re not supposed to criticize any Indians player, ever? We’re supposed to think that all baseball players instantly become great once they put on their Cleveland uniform?
This from a guy who’ll defend any cazzi jadrool who ever put on a scarlet and gray uniform!
Resident LGT beer kinda sewer
by mauichuck on Jul 21, 2008 1:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Excuse me, but when have I ever defended any Buckeyes player? In fact, when have I ever discussed any Buckeyes player on this site?
by Buckeye Brad on Jul 21, 2008 3:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hey Chuck, are you going to answer my question or just continue to make baseless accusations?
You know, I love reading this site and participating in intelligent baseball discussions. But it seems like there is a double standard here among the members. If you’re a “regular”, you can say whatever you want and get away with it from the other regulars. If you’re a guy, like me, who reads this site often and posts less frequently, you are bombarded by the members here for things you say that don’t agree with everybody here. And you’re assumed to need a lesson about advanced baseball statistics because (some people) think you’re new to them and you don’t know what you’re talking about.
I have posted comments the past few months and been told (a) that I had no idea what I was talking about (when in fact I did) and (b) that I was thinking/saying things that I never wrote or said. I don’t like it when people assume things that I mean without actually reading what I’m saying. Then when I write a reply telling that person that they are off base or trying to defend myself, they don’t feel the need to respond. And now we have a “regular” making competely baseless criticisms of me, and when I ask him to back them up he ignores me. If I had done that, people here would have been all over me. There is definately a double standard here.
by Buckeye Brad on Jul 22, 2008 7:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
If you think Chuck makes these comments and no one is calling on it, you’re just trying to paint yourself the martyr.
Steel Nick
by nickjs21 on Jul 22, 2008 7:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wow dude, chillax. You may find this hard to believe but I don’t spend all day monitoring the site.
Here how about this: I may have confused you with another Columbus based poster. If I did I’m sorry. Anyway, is it a real big deal if you’re a OSU appologist?
Resident LGT beer kinda sewer
by mauichuck on Jul 22, 2008 7:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You posted a comment below 8 minutes after I posted my comment. So I find it hard to believe that you didn’t read it. It has nothing to do with you monitering this site all day—neither do I.
Also, thanks for the apology. That’s all I wanted.
by Buckeye Brad on Jul 22, 2008 8:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
BTW, I was gonna ask you, how’d you end up in Dodd Hall?
Resident LGT beer kinda sewer
by mauichuck on Jul 22, 2008 8:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Last November, I got in a really, really bad car accident – as in, I’m lucky to be alive. I was driving home from school and a guy turning hit my car on the driver’s side. (Of course, he had no insurance.) I had about 15 broken bones and have gone through 11 surgeries since then (and I’ll probably have a couple more). I didn’t come home until April and had to go back to the hospital a couple more times since then.
I’m walking now pretty well with a cane or a walker, and doing therapy three times a week to keep improving. My range of motion on my left knee and right hip is still limited, my left elbow doesn’t bend, and my right foot doesn’t move at the ankle because of nerve damage in my leg.. My goal is to get back to teaching in September, although I’ll probably spend most of the day in a wheelchair because I have almost no edurance and get tired very quickly. I just want to get back to a normal life.
This is the reason that I wasn’t around this site pretty much the entire offseason. I missed opening day at the Jake with my wife for the first time in a few years. Thank you for asking, Chuck.
by Buckeye Brad on Jul 22, 2008 9:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hey,best of luck. Sounds like you’ve got the right attiude, the docs can only do so much for you, the rest ya gotta do for yourself. Stay gritty, dude.
Resident LGT beer kinda sewer
by mauichuck on Jul 23, 2008 6:50 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hello Brad,
Sorry to hear about the accident you were in – I hope everything keep improving for you. Stay strong!
The "cream of the crop" doesn't always rise to the top.
by indiansfan on Jul 27, 2008 7:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nothing I like better than when LGT gets all meta and shit
by supermarioelia on Jul 22, 2008 8:06 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
this is the post of the week
by Gradyforpresident on Jul 22, 2008 8:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Swift you coming to Canada anytime soon? You should join the entourage coming in August.
by supermarioelia on Jul 22, 2008 8:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
it’d only cost like, what, $8,000,000 to make it there with current gas prices (planes use gas too).
i wish i had money.
by Gradyforpresident on Jul 22, 2008 8:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well let me know when you get rich and we’ll meet somewhere halfway.
Also, you’ll be proud of the fact I passed up Ted Nugent tickets for tomorrow night out of principle.
by supermarioelia on Jul 22, 2008 9:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
i’m afraid canada just got worse for allowing him in.
by Gradyforpresident on Jul 22, 2008 9:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Apparently this is his 5th straight year coming to my hometown. I’m guessing he doesn’t go to political on the crowd, otherwise he wouldn’t be welcome back.
by supermarioelia on Jul 22, 2008 10:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hey Mario…since you posted here, I wanted to thank you for selling me your playoff tickets last year for the Yankees series. I haven’t had the chance to do that yet. That was the first playoff game I ever attended and it was fantastic! I’ll never forget that game and the atmosphere was great (even though we were the second row from the top – still awesome).
by Buckeye Brad on Jul 22, 2008 9:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
No problem, glad you had a good time. I’m just happy I got rid of the tickets without a loss.
by supermarioelia on Jul 22, 2008 10:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
But it seems like there is a double standard here among the members. If you’re a "regular", you can say whatever you want and get away with it from the other regulars. If you’re a guy, like me, who reads this site often and posts less frequently, you are bombarded by the members here for things you say that don’t agree with everybody here.
Hey, Brad. You’re right that there is a double-standard, but it isn’t regular vs. irregular. It’s just a double-standard for Chuck in particular. Chuck has just established himself as the crazy old guy, extremely knowledgeable about certain things, but also given to making totally crocked pronouncements that don’t make any sense. And he is basically the only person here — including me — from whom it is tolerated to say totally crazy-ass stuff without the slightest bit of real evidence or logic to back it up.
Of course, not everything he says is crazy, and like I said, he is quite knowledgeable in general.
It may also be the case that the regulars here can more easily tell when the other regulars are joking, or exaggerating for effect. So for example, I might say something outrageous, and you’re thinking, hey, I couldn’t get away with saying that — but the other regulars know that I’m kidding, because they know me.
Anyway … you’re getting pretty regular. Don’t sweat it, it’ll all make more sense as time goes on.
by Jay on Jul 22, 2008 11:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hey, give me a little rhythm here. Given Buckeye Brad’s avatar you can see how I got confused. And again, when did being an OSU chauvinist become a crime?
Resident LGT beer kinda sewer
by mauichuck on Jul 23, 2008 7:03 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I was just offended that you implied that I was some sort of OSU apologist. I am a Buckeyes fan, of course, but that doesn’t mean that I blindly defend every OSU player.
by Buckeye Brad on Jul 23, 2008 9:19 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Also Chuck, you and I have had some arguments on this site before where you have said some crazy things and then tried to back them up when I called you on it. But I don’t think you’re a bad guy or anything….I’m sure I would enjoy sharing a beer with you if you’re ever in Columbus.
by Buckeye Brad on Jul 23, 2008 11:28 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Chuck in Columbus? Heaven forfend that he deign to visit this town he has denigrated at every opportunity!
Free Andy Marte!
by woodsmeister on Jul 23, 2008 1:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Usta live in Columbus – on Seibert and Mohawk for awhile and then UA offa Lane. In fact my kid’s in Columbus right now at the in-laws.
Ah Columbus, not exactly West Virginia – but you can smell the pig-shit and hear the banjos for there.
Resident LGT beer kinda sewer
by mauichuck on Jul 23, 2008 1:57 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Are you referring to the Columbus that is now almost two times the size of Cleveland? I know people used to think of Columbus as a “cow town”, but it’s far from that now.
by Buckeye Brad on Jul 24, 2008 9:16 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
/cancels plans to herd cattle down High St.
In all seriousness, though, Columbus’s population is larger, but geographically, its municipal boundaries include what would otherwise be quite a few suburbs. It’s like redrawing the map to put Shaker Heights, Lakewood, Brook Park, Cleveland Heights, and Parma into Cleveland.
In any event, Cleveland’s Nielsen designated market area is 17th, and Columbus’s is 32nd. I don’t think there’s much question that Cleveland’s the more populous metropolitan area.
by fleerdon on Jul 24, 2008 9:31 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh, I’m completely aware of that. My house in C-bus sits on land that 20 years ago was probably farmland (near the Polaris shopping area). That whole area has grown, but instead of becoming a suburb it’s been absorbed by the city of Columbus. Cleveland doesn’t have that luxury, as you’ve stated. And I know Cleveland’s metropolitan area is still quite larger.
My point was, though, that Columbus isn’t the small city that is used to be. All of central Ohio is growing while most of the rest of Ohio is losing population.
by Buckeye Brad on Jul 24, 2008 11:41 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Two times the size?
Well, there are two ways to answer this.
One is to pull out the Metropolitan Statistical Areas and start getting technical with population studies, market sizes, the reasons why Columbus annexed the hell out of central Ohio and Cleveland couldn’t, ec.
The other is just to point out the Columbus is a hellhole, almost totally lacking the cultural elements that make a big city great, and if it’s grown by leaps and bounds, then that just makes it an even bigger hellhole.
by Jay on Jul 24, 2008 3:00 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, your first point I already discussed above. Did you read that?
As to your second point, what is the reason for calling Columbus a “hellhole”? What has that city ever done to you? You sound like you have an agenda.
(By the way, in case it’s not clear, I’ve never said nor have I intended to say that Columbus is a “better” city than Cleveland. I was just responding to Chuck’s degrading remarks about the city. Why can’t people just discuss things without getting nasty about them?)
by Buckeye Brad on Jul 24, 2008 3:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why can’t people just discuss things without feigning offense?
by KevinV on Jul 24, 2008 3:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
An agenda? I can’t imagine what my agenda would be. I live 500 miles away, and I never lived there, and I have no plans to visit. I only know it from many visits there when my friends and brothers were living there, mostly while at OSU.
My familiarity with Cleveland is not that much greater than that, although it is more recent. I started seeing more of Cleveland around the same time, early 90’s, and it’s always seemed like a pretty nice town to me, unlike Columbus, which has always seemed like a hellhole.
There might be jobs to be had in Columbus, and obviously that’s something to be considered. Other than that, I’m not aware of any good reasons to live there.
by Jay on Jul 24, 2008 4:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
So you missed out on the majesty that was 1970’s era Cleveland?
by ganatz on Jul 24, 2008 4:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Pretty much. I can’t say I remember anything about Cleveland in the 70’s, except for going to a bunch of ballgames mid-to-late 70’s.
Keep in mind, major concerts and the Cavs were in Richfield, which is certainly not Cleveland.
by Jay on Jul 24, 2008 8:18 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I obviously can’t figure out the subtleties of the “reply”...
Richfield never made a damn bit of sense to me. I guess land was cheap, but still. Did they ever make it into a jail?
My apogee of going to ballgames was the late 80’s – the Brad Komminsk era and $3 bleacher seats. I unfortunately was long gone by the glory years of the 90’s.
by ganatz on Jul 24, 2008 9:58 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Gunds sold the site to the Trust for Public Land in 1999, and it was then transferred to the NPS. It’s now part of the Cuyahoga Valley National Park.
Nick Mileti picked the site because he wanted to attract crowds from all of NE Ohio, not just Cleveland. It sat near I-77, I-71 and the Turnpike, although Rt. 303 was a bottleneck that should have been foreseeable. Supposedly, there were 5 million within an hours’ drive of Richfield. Although Richfield was an easy jog from the part of Akron I lived in, it never made a whole lot of sense to me, although sprawl was generally considered an asset in 1974.
by FredOx on Jul 25, 2008 12:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I suppose you’re right—I seem to be known around here as “the guy who wants to bat Grady second.”
by Buckeye Brad on Jul 23, 2008 9:16 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, let’s be honest here … who’s fault is that, really?
by Jay on Jul 23, 2008 11:00 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh, I wasn’t really complaining. I think that’s a subject that should be debated because if Grady’s batting leadoff again next year then something is wrong with the lineup.
But you post one FanShot about a subject and you get tagged with that label.
by Buckeye Brad on Jul 23, 2008 11:24 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
God, is “Grady for the 2 hole” guy still talking?
Sheesh.
by afh4 on Jul 23, 2008 11:34 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
What’d you say, “Are You There God, It’s Me Margaret” guy?
Steel Nick
by nickjs21 on Jul 23, 2008 12:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Enough out of you, “Refuses to Follow Arbitrary Beer Drinking Rules” man.
by afh4 on Jul 23, 2008 12:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
There’s nothing arbitrary about the turning of the seasons, “Only guy to use his own photo as his avatar” dude.
by NickFantana on Jul 24, 2008 10:23 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh my bad “Got beat to his own first name as website handle” person.
by afh4 on Jul 24, 2008 11:18 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Like you’re one to talk “nick that is often confused with the other nick” fella.
-Erik
by drerikbrady on Jul 24, 2008 12:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
He’s not even a nick! He’s an Andrew! He got beat to his own name and then took someone else’s!
You couldn’t of just chose “Jerry771” or something?
by afh4 on Jul 24, 2008 12:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
And what then happens when Jerry DiPoto or Jerry Seinfeld want to sign up and contribute? Am I forever condemned to wander the nickname desert, like an Israelite?
Besides, I’m pretty sure I was a member before Real Steel Nick but our join dates are all screwed up.
by NickFantana on Jul 24, 2008 2:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I joined about the time of the Barfield trade, if that helps.
Steel Nick
by nickjs21 on Jul 24, 2008 2:58 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Is there anyone NOT named Andrew on this site?
"Lotta heart in Cleveland." - Ian Hunter
by Denver Tribe Fan on Jul 24, 2008 3:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’m Andrew and so’s my wife!
-Erik
by drerikbrady on Jul 24, 2008 4:11 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
We could have a scene like that one at the end of Malcolm X, except instead of saying “I’m Malcom X!” we could all say “I’m a meth addict!”
by Jay on Jul 24, 2008 8:19 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
And getting more classic all the time.
by ken from alexandria on Jul 24, 2008 12:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
One FanShot?
I believe you posted two FanPosts. And that second one, come on, you were just asking for it at that point!
by Jay on Jul 23, 2008 3:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The second FanPost wasn’t about Grady batting second, it was about using that lineup tool from Baseball Musings to create the ideal lineup for the Indians using our current batters. Sure, it happend to have Grady hitting second, but that wasn’t the point of it at all. Other batters were moved around, too, not just Grady. I wasn’t trying to prove any “theories”, no matter what some people thought.
I still think that’s a great tool to use and will try it in the offseason with next year’s possible lineups.
by Buckeye Brad on Jul 23, 2008 4:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
My impression as a not-regular is that Chuck is one of those guys who takes his lawn chair down to the convenience store and tells stories that don’t make any sense to anyone but that are really a clever ruse meant to throw everyone off the track of how much stuff he really does know. Like Abe Simpson.
We can’t bust heads like we used to, but we have our ways. One trick is to tell ‘em stories that don’t go anywhere – like the time I caught the ferry over to Shelbyville. I needed a new heel for my shoe, so, I decided to go to Morganville, which is what they called Shelbyville in those days. So I tied an onion to my belt, which was the style at the time. Now, to take the ferry cost a nickel, and in those days, nickels had pictures of bumblebees on ‘em. ‘Give me five bees for a quarter,’ you’d say.
Now where were we? Oh yeah – the important thing was I had an onion on my belt, which was the style at the time. They didn’t have white onions because of the war. The only thing you could get was those big yellow ones…
by FredOx on Jul 23, 2008 9:35 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Awhile back I googled my nom-de-blog and found out that some other incazzato senile vecchiao was calling himself “mauichuck”. Here’s his discription of himself:
Retro-fit iconoclast from the days dinosaurs walked the earth and Clark Gable ruled the silver screen.
Design websites/tell people how spend money on advertising. Write and design and direct to give ‘em they’re money’s worth, but mainly I’m a control freak. Compared to this group, I’m still clinging to the wall, but willing to test my wings and get off the surface.Marvelous to find a bunch that think, not just laterally, but hyper-laterally and in several dimensions. But, it’s much like a MENSA Social where everyone wants to show off.
You will bore me within a week, I think. ;-)
I’m not sure if I fit all of that – I don’t “design” anything but machines – but evedently my webname attracts males of a certain generation and mindset.
Resident LGT beer kinda sewer
by mauichuck on Jul 23, 2008 9:53 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wow … that guy is like a weird hybrid of you and me.
I don’t find this crowd to be anything like a MENSA gathering, mostly because I would never go anywhere near a MENSA gathering.
by Jay on Jul 23, 2008 11:01 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
While I’m with you on rooting for Indians players—I won’t be happy when C.C. strikes out Casey with runners in scoring position—I reserve my right to be fed up with an overachieving, mediocre ballplayer. He’s had a good year offensively, but he’s soon to be 35 years old. His OPS+ since 2004: 122, 99, 114, 101, 116, which doesn’t bode well for next year. I think the team would benefit significantly from shipping him out. The psychological benefit alone could be worth it.
by odradek on Jul 21, 2008 1:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’m lost here. You’re railing against a guy who consistantly OPS+ above the league average for five years and you call it “overachieving”. When, exactly, does he become a league average player? Hell, a just wish the rest of our offense would play at the league average.
Resident LGT beer kinda sewer
by mauichuck on Jul 21, 2008 2:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
What exactly does overachieving mean anyway? Performing better than one expects based on physical gifts? Not to be all Yodaesque, but you either achieve or fail to achieve, and Blake’s having his best season in years based on that stat. Casey’s essentially having i the same season as Mike Lowell, and if any of the rest of this team could hit, we might not be having this conversation.
With that said, Casey is 34, and not the long-term answer at that position, and I’d take a deal if the right one came along. I wouldn’t cry if he was here in 2009 either. IMO, a lot of the anti-Casey animosity is that this team’s offense in 2008 is essentially the Grady and Casey show, when he really should be in the supporting cast, not name above the title territory.
by FredOx on Jul 21, 2008 2:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
“If you play a game of chance know before you begin
If you are benevolent you will never win.”—Wm. Blake
My dislike of Blake is irrational. It is based on his career RISP with two outs (482 PAs, .209 BA, .637 OPS). My irrational dislike is based on my belief he has partly succeeded because of perceptions of his character. He is perceived as a “ball-player.” If he played like Tito Fuentes he’d be sent packing in a fortnight. I would say he is an overachiever because he didn’t get any regular playing time in the bigs until he was 29 years old. He had 2784 at bats in the minor leagues. He had some pretty good numbers in the minors, so you could make a case for him being jobbed, and kept down when he could have played in the majors. But someone somewhere wasn’t sure about him, so I cite that as proof of Casey’s overachieving.
And I agree with FredOx that we wouldn’t notice how annoying Blake is if there were three other guys hitting.
by odradek on Jul 21, 2008 4:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Consistently above average? No, his OPS+ has alternated between dead-average (99, 101) and somewhat above-average. So he appears to be a solid-average player on the whole — but only if you ignore defense, and positional value, and age. Blake has always been either an above-average RF or a below-average 3B, and he’s gone from 30 to 34 in those seasons.
RF are expected to hit somewhat above average, so when he posts that 99 in 2005, he’s now a somewhat below-average player — not way below-average, because he was a plus defender out there, but somewhat below.
In 2006, he was an average hitter for a RF and a well above-average defender, so he’s solidly above-average that season.
3B are expected to hit right around league average, so when he returns to 3B in 2007 and posts that 101, he’s again a somewhat below-average player, combining his average hitting with his weak defense at that position.
Back in 2004, he had his career year at the plate but was an absolute butcher around the bag (hence his subsequent move to RF), so even in his best year, he’s only somewhat above-average all things considered. And now in 2008, he’s almost as good with the bat and very nearly as bad with the glove.
So on the whole … he’s ranged from a bit below average to somewhat above average, but common sense says his upside diminishes as he gets older. The main effect of his very good 2008 season is that it would seem to reduce the chance of a collapse in 2009.
It would seem to.
by Jay on Jul 21, 2008 3:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
How do beards effect player valuation? I don’t remember him having one in 2004 but he has one now. Doesn’t that make him closer to being well above-average?
Proud supporter of the Cleveland.
by fwembt on Jul 21, 2008 7:18 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ironically, facial hair evaluation is kind of a weak spot in my analytical skills.
by Jay on Jul 21, 2008 7:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think it’s high time we demanded that some stathead develop a critical analysis of VORB (Value Over Replacement Beard), VORG (Value Over Replacement Grit) and VORFH (Value Over Replacement Facial Hair).
Free Andy Marte!
by woodsmeister on Jul 22, 2008 10:44 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
OK, I forgot to ask you: there are 29 other starting thirdbase in the ML. Which 15 are better than Blake?
Resident LGT beer kinda sewer
by mauichuck on Jul 23, 2008 6:58 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Right now, I’d put Jones, Rodriguez, Wright, Glaus, Longoria, Encarnacion, Ramirez, Cantu, Beltre and Atkins ahead of Blake. All are having seasons at least comparable to Casey and most are younger. You might put Blalock on that list too, but he’s only just come back from an injury. Lowell and Rolen are comparable offensively, about the same age, but better defensively. Then there are the youngsters with potential, such as Kouzmanoff, Gordon and LaRoche. Filling out a lineup card this afternoon, you’d probably take Blake, but they’re all at least 8 years younger. That’s just off the top of my head; I haven’t really looked at any of their stats.
by FredOx on Jul 23, 2008 9:53 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
If we’re going by VORP, there are only seven 3B in the majors higher than Blake. But this is only 2008.
As for a subjective “better,” those ranked below Blake in 2008 VORP that I’d still vouch for: Aramis Ramirez, Edwin Encarnacion, Garret Atkins, Adrian Beltre, Joe Crede, Alex Gordon.
Take your pick with Lowell, Rolen, and Kouzmanoff.
Steel Nick
by nickjs21 on Jul 23, 2008 9:58 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Blake is having an unusually good season with the bat and a fairly typically bad season with the glove. Actually, we only have good data for three seasons with the glove at 3B, and he’s been very bad for two of them (2004 and 2008) and okay for one (2007).
This season, per RZR, there are 20 starting guys better. And not listed there: Marte, LaRoche.
Just one data point of course.
by Jay on Jul 23, 2008 11:05 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
So when you sort through the numbers, the smoke and the bovine excrement you get that Casey’s at least as good as most of the thirdbase men in baseball – somewhere between eighth and fourtheenth. Meanwhile we’ve got a guy OPSing somewhere near the Mendoza OPS line who everybody here wanted playing third base while the Tribe was still in the hunt. I don’t get that.
That being said, now that we’re waving the white-flag, it makes much more sense to move Blake to first, replace Garko and let Marte audition at third. I get that. Trading Blake for a prospect makes sense too. But all of this has much more to do with the Tribe’s situation and very little to do with Blake’s baseball skills. The guy can still play.
Resident LGT beer kinda sewer
by mauichuck on Jul 23, 2008 12:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
10 days until the trading deadline. I’d put my money on this Thursday, just because it’s an off day.
Newsday has a no-facts-pure-speculation quote connecting Blake to the Mets.
Steel Nick
by nickjs21 on Jul 21, 2008 8:36 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Where’s fleerdon? Isn’t he our most unapologetic Blake booster?
I’ve gotta say that Blake has always had two really solid attributes, neither of which are quantifiable (and therefore possibly worthless) but which have made me always like him. First, he’s always played multiple positions, some of them decently, and gone wherever the Indians asked him to play without complaint (or at least I can’t remember him ever grousing about it). This has made him valuable as utility player. And it plays into the second point, which is that he does seem to be a good clubhouse guy. And he’s relatively cheap. Having said that, at his age he’s got virtually no future with the Indians and I hope to see them move him to a club that can use him for a mid-level prospect and hope he does well wherever he goes.
My guess is that he wouldn’t get half the flack he gets at LGT if he weren’t blocking Marte.
"Lotta heart in Cleveland." - Ian Hunter
by Denver Tribe Fan on Jul 21, 2008 3:41 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
The only thing that’s blocking Marte is Marte’s play. This tune lost it’s freshness sometime in early July.
Resident LGT beer kinda sewer
by mauichuck on Jul 21, 2008 3:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Marte hasn’t been given any chance so far this year. Do you think you can evaluate a player who starts once every two weeks? I think most of us want to see him play every day for a few months and see what he can do. As it’s been stated many times on this site, his minor league track record certainly shows that he deserves that chance.
by Buckeye Brad on Jul 21, 2008 4:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Andy Marte had 38 atbats in the spring, compared with only 55 in the first three months of the season. Haha with roughly the same average, but there’s your average Indians fan’s idea of giving the guy a legit chance.
by supermarioelia on Jul 21, 2008 4:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Really, in early July? In early July, when Marte started 6 out of 8 games and posted an 855 OPS? That’s when it lost its freshness?
The fact that you’re tired of hearing about it doesn’t mean that the facts have changed. The facts haven’t changed, and the arguments remain the same on both sides. We’ll see how it comes out.
by Jay on Jul 21, 2008 4:06 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
We’ll see how it comes out.
Fight Chuck with Chuck.
by Brick. on Jul 21, 2008 4:15 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Though I’ve always been skeptical about Marte, this is 1000% the right situation to play Marte every day for the rest of the season. He can get 200+ ABs (ok, maybe 180 if Wedge has him bunt at least once every other game) in a situation where no one expects the Indians to win a lot of games. If we’re going to retool and compete over the next few seasons, we have to know whether Marte is for real or if we have to seek some other solution at 3B.
If we don’t move him, Blake can play first. I’m at the point where I think Garko should be shipped to Buffalo until the September call-ups.
"Lotta heart in Cleveland." - Ian Hunter
by Denver Tribe Fan on Jul 21, 2008 4:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
If we can play Inglett and Luna for the entire second half of a season, we sure as heck better be ready to give Marte that same chance
by Roger Dorn on Jul 21, 2008 4:23 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
The question is, if Marte played in 37 games after July 31 and posted a .700 OPS, like Hector Luna did in 2006, would he have succeeded or failed?
by FredOx on Jul 21, 2008 4:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
If he only plays in 37 games after July 31, the organization will have failed.
by Jay on Jul 21, 2008 4:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
this stikes me as very zen.
I hate West Coast Road Trips.
by gte619n on Jul 21, 2008 5:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I hate West Coast Road Trips.And Jack Kerouac was a hack.
by fleerdon on Jul 21, 2008 7:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Isn’t he our most unapologetic Blake booster? Only if you’ve never actually read what I write.
by fleerdon on Jul 21, 2008 5:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Link not working. Perhaps I was mixing you up with someone else.
"Lotta heart in Cleveland." - Ian Hunter
by Denver Tribe Fan on Jul 21, 2008 6:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks. So, yeah, that’s exactly the post I was thinking of. And that STILL makes you our most unapologetic Blake booster. Which says something about this group. He’s a good guy. I will wish him well whichever contender he ends up being a useful utility guy for (unless it’s the Yanks, Sox, or Sox).
"Lotta heart in Cleveland." - Ian Hunter
by Denver Tribe Fan on Jul 21, 2008 8:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, it READS like a great story, anyway. I guess he could also be on PEDs.
I think many, many people who’d been following the team at an LGT-level of intensity were cognizant and appreciative of Blake’s backstory. I wasn’t, not until I did some work and wrote that post—one of my favorite things I’ve ever put together for this site. I wouldn’t call it “unapologetic Blake boosting” because it’s very apologetic, and it’s not boosting. I felt like crap for ripping on the guy so much. He didn’t ask to be a starting third baseman on a championship-caliber club, and he (still) doesn’t really deserve to be one, either.
by fleerdon on Jul 23, 2008 1:37 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Most of the Blake complaints are really thinly-veiled Wedge complaints. With the seasons Garko, Gutierrez, and Dellucci were having, not to mention Hafner’s injury, there was no excuse to bury Marte on the bench.
by Ryan on Jul 21, 2008 7:24 PM EDT up reply actions 5 recs
Amen. Now let’s just get on with and trade him.
by ken from alexandria on Jul 21, 2008 8:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Blake is having a nice hot streak, so people are being generous. If he were in a cold streak people would be dumping on him. The Casey we’ve seen in July, hitting balls into the gap, is not the Casey we’re accustomed to. Beware the ides of September.
by odradek on Jul 22, 2008 1:53 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
The Indians continue to draw significant interest in third baseman Casey Blake, whose defensive versatility makes him an alternative to Nady and the other available right-handed hitters.The Rays are one of the teams pursuing Blake, though he is not an ideal fit. Blake, who turns 35 on Aug. 23, has not played the outfield regularly since 2006, and the Rays would use him mostly in right.
The Mets would have the same concern, and ideally they want more of a difference-maker than Blake. If they can’t acquire a hitter as accomplished as, say, the Mariners’ Raul Ibanez, they could turn to Class AA outfielder Fernando Martinez, who does not turn 20 until Oct. 10. Martinez, a left-handed hitter, might already be with the Mets if he hadn’t missed six weeks with a hamstring injury.
I wonder if we start seeing Blake play right.
Steel Nick
by nickjs21 on Jul 22, 2008 5:38 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Raul Ibanez OPS : 116
Casey Blake OPS: 118
Obviously, Ibanez track record is much better but Casey is two years younger and they’re both so old who knows what to expect.
by afh4 on Jul 22, 2008 7:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ya know what? Casey could last as almost long as Julio Franco. He’s been healthly for a long time with no real injury history and I haven’t seen any down turn in his performance recently. Just cuz a lot of players decline at 35 doesn’t mean that they all do.
Resident LGT beer kinda sewer
by mauichuck on Jul 22, 2008 7:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Except it’s not fair to compare Casey to Julio. During his age 35 season (1994) Julio hit .319/.406/.510, OPS+ 136. For nine out of ten seasons between Franco’s age 27-38 he had an OPS+ above 108.
by odradek on Jul 22, 2008 9:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I wouldn’t be surprised if Casey plays well into his late 30s, particularly if he moves to the outfield.
by Ryan on Jul 22, 2008 10:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Do you mean that Casey plays until he reaches his very late 30’s, or that he plays at an above average rate until his late 30’s? Because you can read that statement either way (or at least I did).
by Buckeye Brad on Jul 22, 2008 11:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I hear you. My first thought was that Blake hadn’t played particularly well in his mid-30s.
by odradek on Jul 23, 2008 12:30 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I meant well as in, plays until he’s 38 or 39. Not well as in, he’s going to be posting .850 OPSs when he’s 38 or 39.
In other words, I think he’ll age well because he was athletic to begin with, and not tied to third base.
by Ryan on Jul 23, 2008 12:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
And by that, he should be able to stick around as a utility guy.
by Ryan on Jul 23, 2008 12:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I would agree with that assessment. Casey can play for a few more years as a utility guy putting up decent numbers. But I don’t think anybody should count on him to be their starting third baseman for the next few years.
by Buckeye Brad on Jul 23, 2008 12:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
what exactly does this have to do with grady batting second?
by Brick. on Jul 23, 2008 12:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Blake missed almost two months in 2006 (age 32) and missed a month or more three years in a row, ages 25-27. That’s why Coskie passed him on the Twins depth chart, which is why we were able to get him for nothing. I would agree, however, that he shouldn’t be considered a significant injury risk at this point, as he’s been healthy for all but two months out of the past seven seasons.
The great majority of players are already declining at 30, and nearly all of them have a steep decline at some point between 33 and 36. As PED use becomes much less rampant, we’re seeing more of what we saw prior to the 90’s — guys “suddenly” losing it in their early 30’s, rather than their mid-to-late 30’s. Oh, well … at least we know Robbie Alomar was clean.
Blake is already beating the odds, doing well just shy of his 35th birthday, but it would be a mistake to bet on that continuing. Betting anything significant on a player like Blake is an exact hallmark of bad organizations — the Pirates of the past 15 years, the Indians before that.
by Jay on Jul 22, 2008 11:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
blake is widely recognized as the best athlete on the team and tom hamilton thinks he looks impressive with his shirt off. i think both of these factors come into play here.
by Brick. on Jul 23, 2008 12:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think Blake is still the swing-man for my 5-on-5 Indians basketball team. Grady at 2-guard. Barf was at point, now I don’t know who. Carroll? Drubs could probably be a solid PG, but first I’d want to know if he’s ever played basketball. Francisco, perhaps?
We’ve got problems in the frontcourt, though. Sabathia gone, Westbrook rehabbing. C’mon, Zach Jackson. We need you up here.
by fleerdon on Jul 23, 2008 1:30 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Asdrubal is the guy who takes a smoke break every two games, stands around calling for the ball on offense and barely gets past the half-court line in defense.
Proud supporter of the Cleveland.
by fwembt on Jul 24, 2008 9:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wouldn’t this be more Jhonny than Astro?
by supermarioelia on Jul 25, 2008 10:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
oooo … this comes perilously close to using some sort of validation based on historical data. But chuck would never fall into that kind of trap would he?
by talonk on Jul 23, 2008 12:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You’ll hafta explain that to me talonk. Validation based on what historical data? Data gathered from the performance of a number of other players, is that it? So what you’re telling me is that on average, average players play averagedly, is that right?
Resident LGT beer kinda sewer
by mauichuck on Jul 23, 2008 1:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Was just poking fun at ya. You have been railing againsting projection systems (pecot, etal). This just sounded like a projection based on what Franco accomplished, nothing more.
by talonk on Jul 23, 2008 1:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
We’re not always talking about averages. Sometimes we’re talking about overwhelming trends.
In particular with respect to aging, I think you’d find that if you take all the HOF and near-HOF guys out of the equation, you’d have well under 1% being productive past 35. (I didn’t look that up, it’s just a guess having read a lot on related subjects.)
My point: Blake is not even close to a near-HOF guy, so it would be unwise to pull random HOF comps out of the air to rationalize his possible longevity.
by Jay on Jul 23, 2008 3:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Especially if they involve 95-year-old freak of nature Julio Franco.
by FredOx on Jul 23, 2008 3:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You’re not suggesting Julio Franco is a HOFer, are you?
Burn on, big river, burn on...
by Turkmenbashi on Jul 23, 2008 3:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Add to that the fact that—as Dave Cameron puts it—Ibanez is about as useful as a Weighted Companion Cube in the outfield.
Steel Nick
by nickjs21 on Jul 22, 2008 10:15 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
rec’d for the reference. man i gotta stop hanging out with you nerds and go play that game again.
by mrich on Jul 24, 2008 10:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Fernando Martinez playing in the majors right now would be hilarity of epic proportions.
by Joe. on Jul 24, 2008 10:11 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
What are you talking about? That .757 OPS in AA is baller.
by afh4 on Jul 24, 2008 11:19 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Did you translate that to account for being a prospect on an East Coast team? His ECTOPS is 1.062.
by NickFantana on Jul 24, 2008 2:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
ECTOPs will have to be adjusted, because prospects for the Phillies and Orioles are excluded. And the Marlins don’t matter, either.
by odradek on Jul 24, 2008 4:08 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That’s Mid-Atlantic Adjusted East Coast Team OPS
by NickFantana on Jul 24, 2008 5:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
And the Nats don’t even have prospects.
by mrich on Jul 24, 2008 10:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

by 
















