Kinston Indians

by APV on Sep 2, 2008 9:32 PM EDT Comment 36 comments

Mahoning Valley's season isn't over yet, and Lake County qualified for the playoffs, so Kinston is next in line for a brief season recap. I'll put together a system wide hitting and pitching leaders post later, but for now the team recaps.

Kinston missed the post-season with a 37-32 2nd half record (good for 3rd) and a 35-34 1st half record (good for 2nd). Some highlights:

Beau Mills battled Nick Weglarz for the title of top Kinston hitter, and with a very strong second half (.327/.393/.569) won the crown. Mills improved across the board in his offensive categories from a year ago. The only real disappointment is that he was relegated to 1B (not 3B) defensively.
Nick Weglarz wasn't too shabby either, and before heading off to represent team Canada in the olympics put together a pretty nice month of July (.318/.431/.529). Weglarz power numbers actually dropped off from last season (ISO .221>.162), but he also considerably cut his K% (24.1>16.8) while upping his already impressive walk rate. Considering his age, he's still a very good prospect, even if he's still waiting for his real "breakout".
Of course both of the above were outshown by the arrival of Carlos Santana following the Blake trade. Santana was one of the best minor-league hitters in all of baseball this season and showed it in his 29-game stint in Kinston (.352/.452/.590).
Carlos Rivero, who began the season as a 19-year old, also elevated his season with a great 2nd half (.300/.371/.474), finishing the season with a .753 OPS. Again, improvement across the board in his offensive stats. Stayed at SS all season, although put up 24 errors.
Interestingly, Rivero's middle-infield counterpart at 2B was a fellow Venezuelan who put up nearly identical numbers to Rivero, albeit with 15 fewer errors. Niuman Romero is more than 3 years older than Rivero, though.
Two prospects who disappointed were Jared Goedert (.255/.336/.373) and John Drennen (.235/.313/.317). Can't win'em all. For those Chester Copperpot, I mean Cirilo Cumberpatch fans, he also disappointed (.236/.299/.290).
Hector Rondon was the headliner of an interesting group of pitchers. Despite a few rough starts at the end of the season he finished a K/IP, 0.9 H/IP (.239 average against), and almost 3.5 K/BB.
22-year old Carlton Smith ended the season with 1 more inning pitched than Rondon, but actually allowed fewer walks (42>33), an equal number of HRs (12), and just a few more hits (130>143). He only struck out 0.55/IP, though.
Jeanmar Gomez, Rondon's 20-year old counterpart, had a rough first half, but showed dramatic improvement in the second half (BB% >10% in the first half, <5% in the second half), hopefully suggesting good things in his future.
Kelvin De La Cruz was a second half call-up from Lake County and while he had his strikeouts working for him (36 in 29 innings), he didn't have his control (25 BBs). That did not lead to a lot of success (6.44 ERA). Mike Pontius is another guy whose control blew up after making the transition from Lake County to Kinston.
Josh Tomlin spent most of the season as a bullpen/swing-starter guy for Kinston, putting up a fairly ridiculous tally of 109 Ks to just 16 BBs in 102 innings. He'll be 24 this off-season, but I wish we'd hear more about him.
A bunch of bullpen arms put up impressive K-rates (with mixed other stats), including Neil Wagner, Matt Meyer and Dan Cevette.

1 recs | Comment 36 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Smith looks like a sinker ball pitcher with very good control (based on his groundball percentage being at 58.1%, although its only an assumption). Thats a sleeper prospect right there

by hans on Sep 2, 2008 11:17 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

He’s Corey Smith’s brother, I think.

Kinston was awesome this year. Just the best. Especially once Santana came to town.

by afh4 on Sep 2, 2008 11:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Hello Andrew,

You’re correct – Carlton is Corey’s younger brother.

The "cream of the crop" doesn't always rise to the top.

by indiansfan on Sep 3, 2008 12:46 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Hello hans,

If I remember correctly, Smith has over 2 GB/FB ratio (haven’t checked it recently), so he does compensate for the lack of Ks with a lot of groundball outs. It will be interesting to see how he fares at Akron, especially whether he can remain in the rotation or if he’ll become more of a groundball specialist out of the bullpen.

Just my 2 cents.

The "cream of the crop" doesn't always rise to the top.

by indiansfan on Sep 3, 2008 12:48 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

His final GB/FB ration is 2.13. Last year, it was 1.5.

by ClarkM on Sep 3, 2008 8:38 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Hello APV,

Nice job, as usual. :-)

A few thoughts:

1. Rivero’s 24 errors at SS is arguably a bit low for a player as young as him remaining at SS; I don’t recall how many Jeter made coming up through the Minors (Low-A or High-A – don’t remember which level), but I’m pretty sure it was more than 24 Es. Therefore, while he still needs to improve, 24 Es at SS for a player Rivero’s age is probably more of a positive than a negative in my opinion, since it’s often common for players at that level to have 30+, 40+, and even 50+ errors after a full season.

2. A slight correction on one player’s name – it’s CumberBatch, not CumberPatch (not the capitalization, but the letter. :-) Also, while Cumberbatch did have a disappointing season (and I think he had some time off from an injury as well, if I remember correctly), he’s just a month older than Drennen (both age 21 season), and unlike Drennen, this was his first season at High-A. Both are much younger than Goedert, who was in his age 23 season.

3. Cevette has the most experience of the three, but has also dealt with the most injuries and downtime. While it’s possible he could be useful, I think Wagner and Meyer are the two to watch, with Wagner having a brief trial at AA (with mixed results, if I remember correctly). Both he and Meyer have to maintain consistent command, but from the reports I’ve read and heard, both have the stuff to handle hitters higher up if they can command it over the plate – Wagner’s fastball was reportedly second only to Adam Miller’s in the entire system, and I think his breaking stuff has come along as he’s pitched more, which is why he started to flourish later in the season at Kinston. Meyer’s command improved much more than his first go-around at Kinston in 2007, so he too should be ready for AA in 2009.

4. I agree about Tomlin and am a bit surprised he wasn’t moved up to Akron this year. While he was solid as a starter, I believe he was even better/more dominant out of the bullpen. I would think he’ll start 2009 at AA Akron (probably as a reliever, though I suppose he could begin as a starter to begin 2009) and could be a quick mover if he can adapt quickly to AA.

Just my 2 cents – again, good job as usual.

The "cream of the crop" doesn't always rise to the top.

by indiansfan on Sep 3, 2008 1:01 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I want our shortstops to be better fielders than Derek Jeter, but since he’s the one you brought up, he made 56 errors in 126 games as a 19-year-old in Class A Greensboro in 1993, 25 in 1994 split between A+, AA and AAA, and 29 in 123 games in Columbus in 1995 before a September callup to the Bronx.

by FredOx on Sep 3, 2008 9:05 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Hello FredOx,

Thanks for the info. – I knew Jeter had made over 50 Es; he really brought that down the next year though, though that could have also been due to lack of range as mentioned in the post by JP_Frost, since we’ve noticed over the years that Jeter’s range isn’t all that great (and arguably, was never great, though better than he has shown over the last few seasons).

Just my 2 cents.

The "cream of the crop" doesn't always rise to the top.

by indiansfan on Sep 3, 2008 4:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

you’re right that 24 errors isn’t that much for minor leaguers, but it could also mean that his range wasn’t that great and therefore hade fewer chances to make errors. For example, Jhonny Peralta made 27 errors in 125 games in Kinston (both Rivero and Peralta played there at roughly the same age), and we now know that he’s average at best with the leather.

Minor league baseball reference has a range factor stat, but it’s a little hard to make any conclusions based on that. Alcides Escobar who is widely considered as one of the best fielding shortstops in the minors has a 5.28 RF, while Rivero has a 4.18 RF. However, Reid Brignac, who also considered a slick fielder, has a 4.20 RF, so I guess we’ll have to hear what scouts think about Rivero’s defense.

by JP_Frost on Sep 3, 2008 10:24 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Hello JP_Frost,

Good point about the range factor – from what I have read and heard about Rivero, most thought he’d move to 3B in the near future, but the Indians seem to be impressed with his SS defense this year that they aren’t ruling him out as a future SS at this point. Of course, that could change – only time will tell.

Just my 2 cents.

The "cream of the crop" doesn't always rise to the top.

by indiansfan on Sep 3, 2008 4:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

his size just reminds me so much of Peralta (and Rivero is actually a couple of inches taller), plus he’s still very young which could mean that he gains more weight. It’s not impossible for a big guy to play short, but I’m not sure if he’s athletic enough. However, if the FO decides to keep him there and just let him play his way off the position, then maybe there’s a future for him as a SS, but I don’t think he’ll ever be great there.

For now though, I think we should be pretty excited about this kid and he has great potential.

by JP_Frost on Sep 3, 2008 7:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Hello JP_Frost,

I agree that we should be excited about him – he had a very solid year at High-A at age 20 (I think); I think most are expecting him to move to 3B, but the fact that he hasn’t yet must speak to the fact that the Indians may see him as a solid SS there (not GG-great, but solid enough to be there, especially if his bat is productive).

Either at 3B or SS, Rivero is turning into a notable player-position prospect that bears watching in the coming seasons.

Just my 2 cents.

The "cream of the crop" doesn't always rise to the top.

by indiansfan on Sep 4, 2008 12:12 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Don’t invest too much in Cevette. He got hurt again and retired mid-season.

by ken from alexandria on Sep 3, 2008 7:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Hello ken,

Thanks for that info. – I had not heard about his retirement, but I thought something happened to him again because he had disappeared from the box scores (again).

As I mentioned above, Wagner and Meyer are the two to watch from those three listed. In fact, Wagner nailed down Akron’s Game 1 win over Bowie – 3.0 IP/1 H/3 K. This was after Randy Newsom, who has faltered a bit of late, couldn’t hold onto the save in the 9th inning after Wyatt Toregas gave Akron the lead in the top of the 9th inning with a solo HR. Fortunately, Akron came through with another run in the top of the 12th, and Wagner slammed the door from the 10th through the 12th.

Just my 2 cents.

The "cream of the crop" doesn't always rise to the top.

by indiansfan on Sep 4, 2008 12:14 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I have to be honest, I think the discussion of Rivero moving to 3B is so totally overblown that it borders on complete BS.

All of this talk, from what I can tell, stems from a single comment made by Lastoria back in January. He lists a series of defensive pluses and minuses on the guy, and the conclusion is, the Indians believe that he’ll be at shortstop for the long haul.

So basically … he’s a shortstop. And there are really only two kinds of shortstop prospects, the first being the slick-glove guy (“but can he hit?”) and the second being everyone else (“can he stick at shortstop?”). But not everyone who isn’t a glove-first shortstop prospect is suspect at that position.

Rivero is not perfection as a defensive specimen, but that is a far cry from being someone likely to move positions. The club has given no real indication that they consider this to be a concern, so it’s pretty silly for us to have a protracted discussion about his body type, etc. This is not a real issue.

by Jay on Sep 4, 2008 4:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

it’s not just Lastoria that mentioned it, BA also states in the handbook that he might outgrow the position. None of us are saying he will definately move off SS neither are we down on him that it might possible in the future, but it’s not some made up discussion, so I think it’s a fair one to have.

by JP_Frost on Sep 4, 2008 7:58 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Hello Jay and JP,

I recall BA also mentioning the possibility of Rivero “outgrowing” the position, even referencing one scout who thought that Rivero’s body type was similar to Miguel Cabrera’s, which is why the scout thought that Rivero may move to 3B in the future, being that Cabrera and his similar body type did also.

With that said, the fact that Rivero stayed at SS all season has to speak to the fact that the Indians still see him as being a capable defender at SS; while moving him off SS wouldn’t be impossible at this point, being that Rivero may be at AA at some point in 2009, you’d think the Indians would have wanted to introduce him to a new position before tackling AA.

Therefore, unless Rivero is absolutely horrid at SS in the future, and that is not the case at this point from the reports that are mentioned, Rivero will likely remain at SS for the immediate future.

On a similar note, Lonnie Chisenhall will be introduced to 3B (or reintroduced, actually, since he did play some 3B at South Carolina) in the Instructional League, but John Mirabelli mentioned on STO’s Minor League Magazine that they were pleasantly surprised with how he played SS, improving in a few areas. Therefore, it’s not totally-out-of-the-question that Chisenhall could stay there longer than expected, though the Indians still plan on teaching him to play 3B in the Instructional League.

Just my 2 cents.

The "cream of the crop" doesn't always rise to the top.

by indiansfan on Sep 5, 2008 7:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

“On a similar note” — this is my point.

It is not remotely a similar note. The Indians drafted Chisenhall as a 3B – they intended to use him at that position from the get-go based on their scouting.

Now they’ve had Rivero in their system for about four years, I believe, and not only is he still at shortstop, and not only is he a shortstop for the “immediate future” — as you stated — he is a shortstop for the foreseeable future.

In another words: He’s a shortstop.

I appreciate that there is a second source, but the guy is a shortstop. Non-controversy. Talking just to hear yourself talk. It’s not only dull, it’s misleading. The repeated discussion creates the impression that there is concern about Rivero’s ability to play the position. There is merely an awareness that several years into the future — possibly four, possibly ten, possibly never — they may at that future point be concerned.

Not like Chisenhall, not even like Peralta.

by Jay on Sep 6, 2008 7:32 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

wow, talking to hear yourself talk? That’s a bit offensive if you ask me.

This discussion was started because APV mentioned his error total and a couple of gave our opinions about that. Nobody made anything up, in fact I trust BA alot more than I would trust you concerning prospects, so I stated what was said about him. If in the next handbook BA says he’s a legitimate big league SS and those views are confirmed by other sources, then he IS a SS. Right now though, some of those sources say he MIGHT not stick there, and that’s all Indiansfan and I repeated.

so keep the accusatory comments to yourself next time.

by JP_Frost on Sep 6, 2008 10:06 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Thanks for the helpful advice.

I admit that my remarks were probably a bit too strong, but again, the issue here is that every shortstop prospect who isn’t a defensive wizard is someone who conceivably would move to another position. There is an echo chamber effect going on here, where a minor and completely un-exceptional comment about a prospect is blown up into something that’s a major issue, a “problem” for this one prospect in particular.

I think both you and indiansfan both made some astute observations about what we know about him defensively and also raised some interesting questions about just what minor league defensive stats really mean. But here’s where the conversation goes off the rails:

I think most are expecting him to move to 3B, but the fact that he hasn’t yet must speak to the fact that the Indians may see him as a solid SS there

There is simply no basis for that statement at all — no basis for saying that “most are expecting” a move, no basis for pretending that the Indians only “may see him as a solid SS” when the direct quotes of the Indians staff are that they definitely see him as a solid SS. And then this:

one scout who thought that Rivero’s body type was similar to Miguel Cabrera’s

Also nonsense. Granted, that scout’s quote was convoluted and hard to parse with confidence, but when he brought up FatCab, he pretty clearly was making a reference to the possibility of Rivero havign a scary-high ceiling as an all-around hitter, and not so much to his potential to move up seven shirt sizes by the time he turns 25.

When I look at this kid, there is no way I could say, “Nah, he could never be Miguel Cabrera.” I couldn’t say that.

Now, what do we think he’s saying here? Do we think he’s saying that he couldn’t say, “Nah, he could never be as FAT as Miguel Cabrera?” No, of course that’s not what he’s saying. If he wanted to talk about fat, he’d have talked about Prince Fielder. FatCab made a few starts at 3B at age 19, which less skill and range than Rivero, and he moved to 3B full-time at age 20 and got looks as an outfielder at 21. Rivero, meanwhile, started every single game in his age-19 and -20 seasons at shortstop. Nobody made any comparison of the two players on defense, nor does the scout seem to be making a body-type comparison beyond having a projectable frame as a power hitter.

You could find plenty of quotes talking about Rivero’s defense that make no mention of moving positions, yet somehow those quotes will not be discussed. Here’s one from Manaloff in Spring 2007:

Those who watched Tribe minor leaguers at work any of the past few days could not help but notice several players … Carlos Rivero, an 18-year-old shortstop from Venezuela, moves like a major leaguer. Listed at 6-3, he is fluid and confident in fielding his position. The ball never surprises him.

So basically, if a report makes any mention at all that he might not be a shortstop for his entire career, that gets discussed to death, but all other reports do not get any discussion. Again, this is my whole point, it creates a warped perception of Rivero’s defensive caliber and issues.

We get on folks here all the time for being sloppy and misrepresenting the stats. I don’t see this as being any different from that. Context is everything.

by Jay on Sep 6, 2008 1:44 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

first of all, no stats were misrepresented. The amount of errors that Rivero made was stated in the original post, which started a discussion. Those errors aren’t really indicative of a player’s defense, which is why someone brought up Jeter and I mentioned Peralta’s error total at the same level and gave some RF numbers.

It’s funny that you’re penalizing Indiansfan and me for stating only one side of the argument, while you are doing exactly the same. In fact, maybe even more. I can only speak for myself, but I was merely pointing out my own concerns and those of some other sources before the season. It just means that there are mixed opinions about Rivero’s eventual fielding position and there are different reasons for that.

I don’t mind getting on people for saying stupid stuff, but you’re actually saying that this discussion shouldn’t take place because it’s based on nothing … which isn’t true. The mere fact that you were only aware of Lastoria’s comments shows that you’re probably not in the position to critisize me or anyone else for sloppiness and taking things out of context.

That said, I’ll gladly discuss Rivero with you, but there’s no need to get personal about it. Besides, nobody has blown this into a major issue and nobody has said that this was a problem for Rivero.

Here’s what Indiansfan said:

“Either at 3B or SS, Rivero is turning into a notable player-position prospect that bears watching in the coming seasons.”

and here’s what I said:

"However, if the FO decides to keep him there and just let him play his way off the position, then maybe there’s a future for him as a SS, but I don’t think he’ll ever be great there.

For now though, I think we should be pretty excited about this kid and he has great potential."

Honestly, Jay, I think you’re on the one that’s overreacting and turning this into an issue.

by JP_Frost on Sep 6, 2008 2:58 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

last sentence shoudn’t read “… on the one”, but just " … the one". Damn typos.

by JP_Frost on Sep 6, 2008 3:00 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Apparently I am being too subtle — and you are in some kind of glossy-eyed “auto-rebuttal” mode, not really thinking about what I wrote or what you’re about to write.

I don’t think I’ve criticized anything that you personally have written. You can go back and check.

I also didn’t say that stats were misrepresented, I said that “this is no different” — “this” meaning, in this case, that the statements of scouts and other officials have been misrepresented, and that’s just as much of a problem as misrepresenting stats.

I am not presenting only one side of the argument. We could probably dig up 15-20 original-source comments on Rivero’s defense, and apparently two of them mention a possible change of position in the future, while the other 13-18 do not. There is no need to present “the other side,” because you and indiansfan have covered that side completely — and totally out of proportion.

But none of this matters, I guess, since according to you, the fact that I apparently forgot something that I had read means that I don’t know nearly as much as you two towering experts.

by Jay on Sep 6, 2008 4:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

there you go again with the with the personal/sarcastic tone.

How is anything I or Indiansfan have said out proportion? We merely stated what we had read about the possibility of Rivero changing positions and what we thought about that. Never did either of us say that he’d definately move to third or anything like that. You came in here calling BS and started getting a little personal about us being misleading and talking to hear ourselves talk.

Forgive me for feeling a bit offended, but that happens when someone is basically telling you that you’re creating controversy about nothing. This is of no use however, because we’re about to nitpick over words and whatnot, so perhaps we should just end this discussion and get back on topic.

by JP_Frost on Sep 6, 2008 4:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

JP, it’s becoming increasingly obvious that you are just not even really reading what I write. That’s what I mean by auto-rebuttal mode. JUST STOP. I want you to spend a a good TEN MINUTES actually reading what I wrote before responding to this. I’m begging you.

I have already specified two exact comments that blatantly misrepresented the situation. You did not write either comment. Had you actually read my comment — this one — maybe you’d realize that my comments were never directed at you.

Since you aren’t reading what I write, and since I’m not even writing about your comments, it’s a mystery how you can manage to be offended. It’s just ridiculous. Sometimes a “personal/sarcastic tone” is all inside the head of a defensive person.

So originally, you personally had not created a controversy out of nothing. Ironically, you NOW are creating a controversy out of nothing.

by Jay on Sep 6, 2008 4:48 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Okay, that one line about “towering experts” was totally sarcastic, that is true, but in my defense, the comment I was referencing was totally ridiculous.

by Jay on Sep 6, 2008 4:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

"I have to be honest, I think the discussion of Rivero moving to 3B is so totally overblown that it borders on complete BS.

“I appreciate that there is a second source, but the guy is a shortstop. Non-controversy. Talking just to hear yourself talk. It’s not only dull, it’s misleading. The repeated discussion creates the impression that there is concern about Rivero’s ability to play the position.”

considering i was part of that discussion, I felt that was also directed towards me.

Like I said, I don’t mind having a discussion with you, but since you’re constantly taking this denigrating stance, the conversation moves off topic.

I, and other people, stated that there some concerns from various sources about Rivero’s ability to stick at short (which i understand) and you’re saying that there are more sources claiming no concerns about that, so that means that the discussion that started about that is blown out of proportion and basically consists of me and others talking to hear ourselves talk.

And that’s exactly why we’re having this argument now, because instead of only saying that you felt that both Lastoria and BA had it wrong, you also had to make it personal by accusing me and IndiansFan of making the issue bigger than it is.

Shall we drop it?

by JP_Frost on Sep 6, 2008 5:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Wow … still flunking the reading comprehension.

I never said Lastoria or BA have it wrong, and both were citing other sources anyway. I’ve said their comments about Rivero not necessarily staying at shortstop are being misrepresented. They express a mild and unexceptional level of long-term concern, and other sources express no concern at all.

Finally … prior to my comments, you did not really engage in significant discussion about Rivero eventually moving to 3B. Your most extreme remark in that light was: “Maybe there’s a future for him as a SS, but I don’t think he’ll ever be great there.”

I think even that remark is a little pessimistic based on what data we have, but I would not have objected to it.

by Jay on Sep 6, 2008 8:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Hello JP,

I appreciate the support – thanks. I too think this issue has been overblown, and I’m sorry if I inadvertently started it.

To Jay,

2 points to consider:

1. I’m sorry if I didn’t convey everything about Rivero’s defense over the last several years. I was going on the 2008 views of some reputable resources in the industry (BA and Tony Lastoria, whose blog is probably one of the most informative when it comes to Indians’ prospects – outside of those sources, how many other reputable sources really cover Indians’ prospects?), then basically disputed them by saying that the Indians have kept him at SS long-term. For the record, I’m not convinced he’ll be moved off SS either, and I do remember that quote you brought up about his defense, but that was at the beginning of 2007, not 2008, and I thought I was doing well by providing more updated information. I’ll make sure to provide all viewpoints in the future, even if they are from past seasons.

2. The “towering experts” comment was not necessary to make your point, plus it could be argued it violated Ground Rule #2 – personal attacks. Not only is your sarcasm not needed to make your points, but it sometimes detracts from them – something to keep in mind when it comes to your future posts.

The "cream of the crop" doesn't always rise to the top.

by indiansfan on Sep 7, 2008 12:02 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

You are — again — misrepresenting both Lastoria and BA. Do you actually believe the pure fiction that you have posted in this message?

Lastoria and BA never wrote, “most people expect him to move to 3B” — you wrote that, without any basis.

Lastoria and BA never wrote, “there’s a scout who says his body type is similar to Miguel Cabrera” — you wrote that, without any basis.

You did not “refute” them by saying Rivero would be at shortstop long-term — Lastoria has reported that Indians expect him to stay at shortstop, many times. You said that opposite.

I don’t suppose you are a dishonest person, but you apparently are capable of reading something, twisting around its meaning, and then inventing an entire fictional version of it in your head, which you then believe fervently and will write about ad infinitum.

Direct criticism is fair game and easily distinguished from a personal attack. I regret the sarcasm in this case, not because it may have offended you and certainly not because of the ground rules, but because that style can undercut the sense that the author is making a real point.

This whole discussion stems back to your being sloppy with the facts, and you haven’t stopped yet.

by Jay on Sep 8, 2008 10:59 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

While this little fracas has been fun to watch, I always thought that the position of the Tribe brass was that Rivero could move to 3B, because he may develop the power you want from a corner infielder. Isn’t that a totally different thing than saying he has to move to 3B because he can’t play SS? Here’s Lastoria quoting Ross Atkins:

On Rivero staying at shortstop: “He is definitely someone who can play shortstop. His power will dictate whether or not he can also be a third baseman depending on the makeup of your team. If you had an Omar Vizquel type then you might consider moving someone like Jhonny Peralta to third base. That could be Carlos Rivero. He is very young, and turns 20 this year at some point this season. He has a full season under his belt already, two half seasons in the Dominican and one in the Gulf Coast League.”

by FredOx on Sep 8, 2008 11:19 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yes, well, that’s one of the 15-20 quotes that don’t get cited, because they don’t fit the distortion that the Indians are worried about Rivero’s defense.

by Jay on Sep 8, 2008 12:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Dude. IF just regurgitates the same things over and over. This Carlos Rivero defense thing is just the latest.

It’s not necessarily a bad thing but it’s how something becomes represented disproportionately-because IF devotes literally 25,000 words to it over the course of a season, none of which are analytical or interesting.

by afh4 on Sep 6, 2008 5:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Andrew,

I’m VERY CERTAIN that I have not posted 25,000 words on Rivero’s defense over the course of this season, being that I’ve had many personal family issues over the course of 2008, and likely haven’t posted 25,000 words on Rivero’s defense over the course of the last 2-3 seasons. Obviously, you exaggerate.

I’ve had many personal family issues over the course of 2008 that I know I haven’t even posted 25,000 words on this blog this season, and I probably haven’t even posted that many words over the course of 3 seasons here. Again, you exaggerate.

I’m sorry if you don’t find my posts interesting – you’re not forced to read them. Skip them if you like – I don’t mind. For the record though, I don’t “regurgitate the same things over and over again” with every post or even most of the posts I make, so I’m thinking you already aren’t reading my posts, which is fine. I’ve commented on many different topics here over the course of 3 seasons that I’m pretty sure it’s not the same things or topics I’m writing about all of the time. If that were the case, I wouldn’t have had to repeatedly look up stats, reports, and information, which I have done, so again, you’re either not reading my posts and/or you’re exaggerating, yet again.

The "cream of the crop" doesn't always rise to the top.

by indiansfan on Sep 7, 2008 12:09 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

fun with leaderboards. Tomlin led the Carolina League in K% with 27.3% (min. 90IP) and was second in BB% with just 4.2%. I have no idea why he wasn’t promoted to Akron mid-season.

by APV on Sep 6, 2008 4:32 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs