Marte Designated to Make Room for RHP Juan Salas
So long to our #1 dominoes player. Per Castrovince:
"Well, you knew the Andy Marte Era would come to an end sooner or later here in camp, and it didn't take long.
The Indians traded for RHP Juan Salas today, sending Minor League INF Isaias Velasquez to the Rays."
almost 3 years ago
cclemens31
400 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
To be honest, it will be nice not to worry about him anymore. I feel he had plenty of chances and blew them all.
Salas has some interesting stats.
I don’t violently disagreement with your take on this. I do feel that he blew some opportunities. But also feel that we comically mismanaged the situation too. They could have given him a nice long look late last year and just blew it.
-Erik
he had plenty of chances
This is a myth, but one that will get repeated a lot.
by Jay on Feb 19, 2009 4:05 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Ok, try this one.
He had a few decent sized windows of opportunity where he UTTERLY FAILED to impress anyone. Either in-person or on-paper by any metric known to man. He cared little about his physique and did not do the little things that can keep you in a Wedge lineup. He played defense well, only because Casey Blake was the measuring stick we held him up to. In his time, he perfected the lazy pop fly, but rarely in times when a man was on third base.
by Toxicadam on Feb 19, 2009 4:17 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
That’s cool, that’s your opinion. But some LGT’ers are in the extreme minority on this one.
Last I checked, Spring Training is an opportunity. AFL is an opportunity. AAA is an opportunity. Pinch hitting is an opportunity. All levels and situations that offer players a chance to perform and stick with a team. Fail.Fail.Fail.Fail.
Craig Breslow is an example of someone not given an opportunity. Brandon Phillips is an example. Andy Marte is merely a bust.
Alex Escobar was given less of a chance then Andy Marte and played on a few non-contending teams. …. and OH BY THE WAY, put up better slightly stats than Marte did. You don’t see any people lamenting the loss of Alex freaking Escobar.
by Toxicadam on Feb 19, 2009 5:14 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I’m with you. Jay and I disagree on this. We screwed him in 2007, without a doubt. I think he screwed himself after that.
I always related to Marte personally albeit at a much lower level of baseball. In high school, I was a pitcher and wanted to play outfield as well, but my coaches wouldn’t play me very often in the field. I would get maybe 1-2 ABs every three games and when I’d get up there, the coach would make me square around and bunt. I was either successful and was not able to reach base, or I would have two strikes on me and have to swing at pitches automatically in an 0-2 hole.
From my own personal experience, it was the most difficult athletic situation I could ever be placed in. I literally had no chance to do anything at the plate and when I spoke to the coaches about it, they said I needed to make the most of my opportunities. There was one game I approached the plate with no one on and two outs, and I smacked a double off of a 325 left field fence. That was pretty much the last at bat I saw though and became a full time pitcher.
Watching Andy, I feel like I was reliving the ordeal
Brandon Phillips is an example.
discredited.
you can’t sit here and scream from the heavens that marte failed every opportunity you listed then claim that phillips never got any chances. FAIL.
notes: just because you say it with authority doesn’t make it so. just because someone esle says something you disagree with doesn’t mean you can just bust out the “that’s your opinion but it’s wrong or in the minority” condescending tone.
You feel Brandon Phillips was given more of an opportunity than Andy Marte?
by Toxicadam on Feb 19, 2009 5:32 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
i think they are extremely similar in general but phillips did have a longer contiguous major league chance to hang himself – though only one.
Do you think BP would have been allowed such an opportunity if the Tribe were a contender that year? Or would it have more likely went down like Marte experienced in 07?
i can’t speculate on changing three variables.
we weren’t a contender, phillips was given 2B, stayed healthy and played himself into a demotion.
we were a contender, marte was given 3B, he got hurt, and blake “played” that into a ‘demotion’.
phillips should have gotten another ML shot in subsequent years so should have marte but i think marte got the raw-er deal when it comes to how that first shot ended.
BP reeeeeally stunk, in all aspects of his game. Never did I think he’d even be as decent as he is now.
Travis Hafner is overrated. Clarity is underrated. David Dellucci is David Dellucci.
BP was given far, far more opportunity than Marte. Part of that was a function of options remaining and the rebuilding/contending timetable, having nothing to do with either the players or the team’s decision-making.
- Both players started a season as a starter and got demoted (2003 and 2007).
- Marte was demoted after playing for three weeks, getting injured and then rehabbing. He was not demoted due to his performance, but rather based on team need. Phillips was demoted after being horrible for over three months.
- Phillips had 383 PA that season. Marte had 60 PA the year he was demoted. That’s “opportunity.”
- Both performed poorly the rest of the year in the minors, after being demoted from a starting job in the majors.
- Phillips had two more years in the minors to resuscitate his career due to his option status. He was mediocre at best and in fact regressed significantly in the second year, walking less while doubling his strikeout rate.
- Marte has never had a chance, after that injured/demoted season, to put his game back together in the minors, due to his option status.
In sum … Marte had VASTLY less opportunity in the majors, and also VASTLY less opportunity to work on his game in the minors, compared with Phillips.
Jay, one thing I never thought of and don’t know much about… do you fault the Braves for screwing up Marte’s option status by rushing him to the majors in ’05?
I'm *always* in the driver's seat, cugino -- Chuck
by Turkmenbashi on Feb 20, 2009 1:35 PM EST up reply actions
I do to some extent, but he was playing awfully well in 2005, and a really good 21-year-old is sometimes making jumps in his hitting ability month after month. If they felt they had to call him up, you can understand that, and if they felt they had to send him down, you can understand that, too. They were a little cavalier about it in that they seemed to call him up just to sit on the bench.
Ultimately, though, I blame the Indians for not re-committing to him at third base at the start of 2008. They had a great idea at the start of 2007, starting Blake in the OF and Marte at 3B, with Blake available as depth 3B in case of a problem. When they made the decision that they had to stick with Blake at 3B for the rest of 2007, used up Marte’s final option, they should have been firmly committed to a do-over in 2008.
There was no reason not to do the same in 2008, and with Marte’s option status, there was plenty more reason TO do it. He didn’t play his way out of a job, but he lost it anyway. There was no real reason not to give it back to him — if not in May 2007, then in March 2008 — but Wedge put the top priority on Blake playing where he wanted to play.
Cool, thanks.
I never understood the 2008 situation either, why we didn’t just start him at 3B. Guess Wedge felt they had a good thing going in ‘07 and didn’t want to mess with the “chemistry.”
I'm *always* in the driver's seat, cugino -- Chuck
by Turkmenbashi on Feb 20, 2009 3:55 PM EST up reply actions
I think the missing piece to this analysis is Blake. They thought Blake was more likely to succeed in the lineup than Marte. Also, they liked Dellichaels, Gutz, and ultimately Fransisco to do better at the plate than Marte. I have a hard time getting down on Marte’s lack of opportunity because I had a hard time disagreeing with any of these decisions. Obviously, Dellicahels didn’t work out. And once we were out of playoff contention, I would have liked Marte to get playing time sooner and more consistently. But I wouldn’t have expected him to do anything to change his situation in 2009.
But (a) at the plate isn’t the whole game, (b) the differences in expectations were not that great, and © there were long-term issues to consider as well. Dellichaels was not a great option. Gutierrez was not a great option, though he also deserved his starting shot (and got it). Blake was a good option for 3B but arguably as good or better for LF. The difference between those guys and Marte, in terms of expectations at the plate, were not so monumental that they outweighed every defensive issue and every long-term issue.
I still can’t get over the Texas game when the Indians were losing but making a run. I can’t remember who was pitching for Texas out of the pen, but he had given up a double and a couple walks to his last three batters, obviously struggling. Marte comes up with the bases loaded and a chance to do some damage, but Wedge pinch hits a lefty making the decision to remove the struggling pitcher an easy one for the Texas manager bringing in a lefty.
This was not a one time thing with Marte, Wedge made it very difficult for him to succeed.
Gah I do remember that, nicely done. Never been so upset with Wedge. Made Washington look like a genius there.
by supermarioelia on Feb 20, 2009 7:37 PM EST up reply actions
Once again, Paul with the great write-up, which completely dismantles this claim.
"Less of an Indians fan" - Jay
I don’t see how it dismantles it at all. It questions how smart the approach was, but I don’t think Wedge’s calculus is all that debatable: Marte in the lineup < any combination of Blake, Dellichaels, Gutz, or/and Francisco.
by Ryan Kelsey on Feb 21, 2009 11:01 AM EST up reply actions
If you’re saying, it isn’t debatable that that was Wedge’s calculus, I agree. In fact, I think it’s far simpler than that. It’s just Marte in the lineup < Marte not in the lineup. He essentially thought of Marte the way we thought of, say, Dellucci.
If you’re saying that that calculus is not debatable … I have to say, far from it. Given the horrendous offensive results we got by not playing Marte, a reasonable (low) projection for Marte’s offense, and the significant defensive upgrade of putting in Marte for Blake and Blake for Dellucci — and the significant offensive upgrade of putting Blake in for Gutierrez now and again — it actually is quite clear that instead starting Marte every day would have been at least a break-even for the 2008 season.
I was saying the first thing.
I agree with your second thing.
by Ryan Kelsey on Feb 22, 2009 12:13 PM EST up reply actions
I agree more with DD in the sense that Wedge probably felt Blake was the more-sure thing at 3B, being that he was the one who held the position at the end of 2007 when the Indians won the Central and made the ALCS.
I’m not sure Wedge (and perhaps the FO) were ever that confident in Marte hitting well enough to hold down 3B over the course of 2008, a season in which the Indians were expected to contend and make a deep playoff push. Wedge probably felt that Marte’s bat wouldn’t hold up the whole season as compared to Blake’s, and he didn’t want to ruin any momentum by having to replace Marte with Blake at 3B, and consequently, have to replace Blake in the OF (with Dellucci especially ) – he likely preferred to have those guys (Dellucci, especially, since he had an injury-plagued 2007 season, and like Blake, is also a veteran, or more of a sure-thing) start the season in their respective positions.
I suppose one could argue that Wedge prefers to play more veterans (or “sure-things”) than rookies or players with minimal experience, unless they really establish themselves (like Cabrera did in 2007, plus they didn’t have many options for the #2 hole, which Cabrera capably filled after moving to that spot in the order, and like Choo seemed to show in 2008, which is why he may find a spot in the middle-of-the order after Hafner/Martinez/Peralta in 2009).
I’m not saying it was the right move – I understand Marte didn’t get many chances, but it’s likely in Wedge’s mind that he wanted to go with the most-sure things he had in an effort to get back to the postseason and win a WS. In his mind, Blake was that sure thing, not Marte; he probably felt that the time for training a rookie on the job was not a season in which we had just won the Central, made the ALCS, and were expected to contend again.
Just my 2 cents.
The "cream of the crop" doesn't always rise to the top.
Wedge probably felt that Marte’s bat wouldn’t hold up the whole season as compared to Blake’s, and he didn’t want to ruin any momentum by having to replace Marte with Blake at 3B
This is 100%, completely irrelevant. Marte’s bat didn’t need to hold up over a full season, because Blake was available to replace him if needed. As for “ruining the momentum” — whatever the hell that means — how could it possibly have gone any worse than it actually did?
Starting the season with Dellichaels in LF (and Blake at 3B) was a slam-dunk defensive downgrade, and no more of a “sure thing” at the plate than starting with Blake/Gutierrez/Dellucci in LF/RF and Marte at 3B. We didn’t have a “sure thing” option, so Marte sitting had nothing to do with wanting a sure thing.
The Braves had no choice. Both Chipper Jones and Wilson Betemit were injured. Marte was the closest thing to a ML-ready 3B they could come up with during that time. They sent him back as soon as they could.
"I've never complained about it. I'm thankful to have a jersey." Mark DeRosa, 22 Aug 2007
Bobby Cox wasn’t going to keep him up in the MLs when he had already developed the reputation of not working very hard. Being sent back was Bobby’s way of “delivering a message” concerning a player’s work habits or general readiness.
I can’t blame them for burning that option when they were trying to win. They often burned an option when they needed someone to help them win (DeRo in 1998 comes to mind) and they thought that the guy would “make it” or “not make it” before the third option would ever come into play.
"I've never complained about it. I'm thankful to have a jersey." Mark DeRosa, 22 Aug 2007
The Braves are obviously an exemplary franchise but it seems like they still let Cox uses the minors promotions/demotions to “send messages” (see: Francouer) than is really prudent in an age when contract status management is such a big part of the game.
I’m not sure that the Braves were thinking options would be an issue with Marte at that point. Heck, I don’t think the Indians considered it when they traded for him.
by Ryan Kelsey on Feb 21, 2009 11:05 AM EST up reply actions
Then you foolishly underestimate the intelligent of the Indians front office.
"Less of an Indians fan" - Jay
That was a slight overstatement. But really, back in 05, I can’t imagine anyone really thought Marte’s career would turn out as it had.
by Ryan Kelsey on Feb 22, 2009 12:16 PM EST up reply actions
Cox sounds like Wedge’s kind of guy. No doubt squandering resources was no big deal to him, since his whole career has been built on the fat of TBS contracts. We’re not that club, and now, they aren’t that club, either.
they thought that the guy would "make it" or "not make it" before the third option would ever come into play
That is often the case, and I think it’s not uncommon to clubs to think this way. I think it’s a big mistake, though. An elite prospect is valuable not just because he’s got a good shot to be a star, but also because he has a very high probability of being at least a decent player. Treating options and “lessons” carelessly is tantamount to saying that if he’s not a star, he’s not worth anything at all. That is a huge error in terms of player valuation.
We can be pretty sure that Marte was not and is not going to be a star (although Carlos Peña provides a counter-example). What we’ve missed out on — because of Cox’s carelessness with the first option and Wedge’s refusal to play him — is the chance to find out if he’s just a solid, decent major leaguer. We could use one of those, and they’re worth a lot when you don’t have one at a certain position.
Also, if you are going to chastise someone for the manner in which the converse, maybe you should do more than cherry pick a small phrase or idea you disagree with and then invalidate the entire thing. That’s just as condescending and disingenous, my friend.
by Toxicadam on Feb 19, 2009 5:54 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
How about:
Marte got virtual no legitimate chances, but failed to impress in the least bit in the admittedly minuscule chances he got.
I'm *always* in the driver's seat, cugino -- Chuck
by Turkmenbashi on Feb 19, 2009 4:26 PM EST up reply actions
Marte gotvirtualno legitimate chances, but failed to impress in the least bit in the admittedly minusculechancesscattered glimpses he got.
Ok, I won’t argue that. But just as we shouldn’t ignore how fully he was screwed by management, we should not ignore how awful he was during those scattered glimpses.
It’s a sad story. Mostly, I’m just relieved to not have to discuss it anymore. That is until the Reds pick him up and he hits 40 homers and makes the all-star team.
I'm *always* in the driver's seat, cugino -- Chuck
by Turkmenbashi on Feb 19, 2009 4:30 PM EST up reply actions
Nope. I was just confirming and re-iterating, I guess.
I'm *always* in the driver's seat, cugino -- Chuck
by Turkmenbashi on Feb 19, 2009 4:32 PM EST up reply actions
did not do the little things that can keep you in a Wedge lineup
like growing a beard?
by DontCallMeJoey on Feb 19, 2009 4:32 PM EST up reply actions
so, clearly i’m an amateur at using the quotation function…
by DontCallMeJoey on Feb 19, 2009 4:33 PM EST up reply actions
Some Juan Salas facts:
A lefty
Drafted by the Rays in 98.
Converted from a 3b to pitcher
Pitched 46+ innings w/o giving up a run at one point.
Busted for PED’s in 2007
Had visa issues last year and missed Spring Training
Also, if I’m looking at this correctly, I believe he should have one option remaining (I’m assuming he wasn’t on the 40-man before being brought up in Sept. ’06).
What’s his dominoes VORP?
"Lotta heart in Cleveland." - Ian Hunter
by Denver Tribe Fan on Feb 19, 2009 4:00 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
Looks like Salas has been good in the minors vs. both righties and lefties, but particularly tough on the former
Which, to this point, has constituted just 52.2 IP over 3 seasons, which is probably why the Indians felt on taking a chance with him – I don’t think he’s had enough time to iron out all the kinks yet, while seeming to have the stuff to be successful in the Majors.
Also, as was mentioned above, he wasn’t turned into a pitcher until a stint as a 3B ended when he was 24-YO, not beginning to pitch until he was 25-YO, which is why he’s a little older than ideal (30-YO in Nov. 2008), but with his type of arm, he could potentially be a late-bloomer and a difference-maker in the bullpen.
Personally, I like the move – Velasquez, by most accounts, was a solid defender and seemed to be more of a guy destined for little power and possibly a bench role, plus is quite a distance away. And, let’s face it, Marte was likely never going to find it in Cleveland.
I think the thing that is most annoying about Marte is that, yes, he didn’t get many chances, but the few chances he did have, he didn’t impress and make you go, “That’s the #1 Atlanta Braves prospect” we were expecting to see. It seemed every time he did have an opening, he just could not hit with any consistency – not just rookie-poor (i.e. some struggles, but some flashes of greatness as well), but just poor (he had trouble hitting .200 and showed virtually no thunder in the bat, outside of one or two very brief periods, and virtually all of that by pulling the ball – balls to CF and RF were hit with no authority, being nothing but the pop-up variety).
That’s why I think many people are down on Marte – granted, the Indians probably did not give him full opportunity to show what he could do, but admittedly, Marte never gave them a compelling enough reason to force them to give it to him. Combine that with the 2007 season being a contending year for us, I can see why the Indians opted to stick with Blake and not ride Marte’s long slumps and infrequent production. They couldn’t afford to ride with him while contending for the competitive AL Central, which is likely why they weren’t willing to start off 2008 with him either, since the Indians were expected to contend; once that goal was vanquished, they could have given Marte more playing time, but between Wedge and the Indians’ FO, they probably felt that Marte was not going to show enough to remain a starter, plus felt that Blake needed to continue to play at 3B to maximize his trade value (and being that we got back Santana and Meloan, I think it was a good choice that they stuck with Blake).
Just my 2 cents.
The "cream of the crop" doesn't always rise to the top.
Well, at least the Indians used the second half of last season to give Marte an extended look.
by xrickx on Feb 19, 2009 3:34 PM EST reply actions 4 recs
First palindromically surnamed Tribesman since Toby Harrah I believe
by cheech99 on Feb 19, 2009 3:35 PM EST reply actions 5 recs
Yea, even if it’s wrong, it was timely.
Travis Hafner is overrated. Clarity is underrated. David Dellucci is David Dellucci.
Wow. I definitely have no memory of Dave Otto. I mean, it’s hard to hold onto the memories of a guy who was given 16 starts and put up an ERA over 7…And he was 6’7". How did I forget this guy?
If I remember correctly he was also one of the Indians that they signed to a long-term contract in the John Hart mode of signing them early and avoiding arbitration – unfortunately, that was one of those contracts that didn’t work out as well as others did (Lofton, Vizquel, Baerga, Belle, Thome, Ramirez, Alomar, etc. – it certainly worked out more often than it didn’t, but there were a few “bad” contracts, Otto being one of them; I believe RHP Jack Armstrong is another one that comes to mind).
The "cream of the crop" doesn't always rise to the top.
From The Cleveland Indians Encyclopedia by Russell Schneider:
Later that winter of 1991-92, Hart, with owner Richard Jacobs, designed and implemented a plan to protect themselves against the loss of the Indians’ best young players, those who were considered the “core” of the club.
It was, Hart said, a plan “to build a competitive club within a fiscally responsible program, and still present a growing, stable club to the fans, which is what really counts.”
It was also a plan that subsequently was endorsed by other major league clubs and became a standard for the industry.
Initially, 12 players were signed to extended contracts that included club options: Sandy Alomar Jr., Carlos Baerga, Charles Nagy, Mark Whiten, Armstrong, Scudder, Glennallen Hill, Dennis Cook, Steve Olin, Dave Otto, Rod Nichols, and Alex Cole.
A year later Hart did the same with Albert Belle, Lofton, Paul Sorrento, Carlos Martinez, Felix Fermin, and Thomas Howard.
Hart admitted they’d made some mistakes in their evaluation of Scudder, Cook, Otto, Nichols, Cole, and Martinez, but they assured themselves of keeping the players they wanted before their salaries would escalate in the open market.
Having players locked into reasonable contracts also enhanced their trade value, as was the case with Whiten, Hill, Fermin, and Howard, and it certainly made Armstrong more attractive to Florida, which selected him in the National League expansion draft of 1992.
Note the use of “core” to talk about these players. Also, note just the sheer number of these deals in only a few short years. The Indians have gotten much more selective. Finally, note that Schneider apparently doesn’t understand that the main effect of these deals was shielding the club from escalating salaries from sequential arbitration hearings, not to mention the relationship strain those hearings often caused.
Thanks for the info. – greatly appreciated!
Yes, the Indians have definitely gotten more selective; it’s amazing to think that ALL those players were thought of as the “core” at that time, though it’s easy to recognize in hindsight which players turned out to be the “core” of the mid-90s and which didn’t.
I think your point about the Indians avoiding arbitration hearings, the possible escalating salaries in those hearings, and the harsh feelings that can occur from those hearings, is astute – that certainly was, and still is, a major factor in why the Indians are willing to sign selected players to long-term contracts. That’s also why we haven’t had any arbitration cases heard since 1991 (Swindell and DiPoto, I believe), which is probably the longest current streak in baseball (if it isn’t, I’d certainly like to know who has a longer current streak).
Just my 2 cents – again, thanks for the excerpt!
The "cream of the crop" doesn't always rise to the top.
You need an avatar. Like a brain and a calculator or something.
Travis Hafner is overrated. Clarity is underrated. David Dellucci is David Dellucci.
I think there was a game where Dave Otto and Robb Nen were both involved in the decision (maybe Nen had the save, can’t remember). When informed of the feat, Nen said “Wow”.
by cheech99 on Feb 19, 2009 4:39 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
Let’s just hope the palindrome party is an acceptable replacement for…well, you know.
by cleveland teamer on Feb 19, 2009 4:43 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I hope one of them jumped into a racecar.
by JulioBernazard on Feb 19, 2009 5:00 PM EST up reply actions 6 recs
To Boston or Atlanta for a 3B prospect.
Travis Hafner is overrated. Clarity is underrated. David Dellucci is David Dellucci.
by westbrook on Feb 19, 2009 3:40 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I think this makes Mujica’s spot more tentative. Masa potentially, although it would really take a breakdown. It’s also still possible Salas and Miller start in AAA.
Here’s Salas’ B-Ref. The only significant time he saw in the majors (in 2007, 36 IP) he wasn’t bad, actually a little above average.
I think the thing I’m most surprised about is the fact that we didn’t keep Marte for camp and just go ahead and deep six Dellucci. I understand there are more concerns surrounding outfield depth than infield depth but I felt there was a good chance that Marte could have a strong spring (since DeRosa was at the WBC) and increase his value leading to a end-of-March type trade. To me, that possibility is more intriguing than the Dellucci over Crowe thing.
I’m just happy to avoid negative. Though I suspect as more people see what I’ve done here, some points will come off the scoreboard.
i give you negative points mostly for reminding me that it’s time for me to revv up the “David Dellucci is my nemesis” corner of my brain. i had been so happy about baseball…
by DontCallMeJoey on Feb 19, 2009 4:36 PM EST up reply actions
I never liked Marte or really believed in him, but for some reason, I’m kinda sad.
I'm *always* in the driver's seat, cugino -- Chuck
You think you’re sad?
Travis Hafner is overrated. Clarity is underrated. David Dellucci is David Dellucci.
I’d hate to be the guy who’s getting operated on, today.
"Lotta heart in Cleveland." - Ian Hunter
by Denver Tribe Fan on Feb 19, 2009 4:00 PM EST up reply actions
I too had reservations about Marte’s ability – I don’t know if it was the fact that he never hit for a great BA at any level in the Minors. I know he was young at each level, but some sixth sense made me think he might not turn out as great as many prospect evaluators were predicting.
I’m still not confident he’ll be that great elsewhere either. He could, perhaps in a Wes Helms-type manner, but even that I’m not confident in. He just does not appear to be able to do any hitting with authority except pulling the ball – there are only so many types of pitches you can pull and hit with authority. Pitchers will learn (if they haven’t already) that he cannot drive the outside pitch with consistent authority – unless he can somehow rectify that, I’m not confident he’ll be that successful at the ML level, even with another team.
I’m sorry he couldn’t figure it out with the Indians and wish him luck – maybe he’ll prove me wrong elsewhere.
Just my 2 cents.
The "cream of the crop" doesn't always rise to the top.
Boy, that text wrapped with authority in your second paragraph
I'm *always* in the driver's seat, cugino -- Chuck
by Turkmenbashi on Feb 20, 2009 1:38 PM EST up reply actions
Also, I can’t believe nobody’s mourning the loss of.. uh.. Isaias Velasquez.
DISCLAIMER: I may be bitter.
Here is Lastoria’s write-up on Velasquez, if anybody is interested.
by Fundamentals on Feb 19, 2009 3:55 PM EST up reply actions
I wonder who slides into the #100 slot now? Have to ask him …
In a related note, both Tony’s book and the MSP Indians Annual are officially obsolete now.
Just finished it. Very good. Entirely more information on it than I’d ever care to know, but still a very good read.
by Fundamentals on Feb 19, 2009 7:11 PM EST up reply actions
Ummm…..
I haven’t even gotten my MSP Indians Annual yet…..
"I've never complained about it. I'm thankful to have a jersey." Mark DeRosa, 22 Aug 2007
I know. It’s sad, isn’t it?
We included everyone who was on the 40-man roster for the last seven weeks — this is the first 40-man change we’ve made since signing Pavano and outrighting Aubrey.
I. I. I. Just don’t know. What to say.
Godspeed, Andy. I love you.
So 2009.
by Gradyforpresident on Feb 19, 2009 3:49 PM EST reply actions
What would be in that outcome for Andy or the Indians? It’s clear the organization has no faith in his ability to play at the major league level. It would likely be better for him to start over with another organization.
by woodsmeister on Feb 19, 2009 4:29 PM EST up reply actions
Maybe there’s a team out there that’s going to give him an everyday job at the majors, but I would guess not. It would be best for him to go back down and dominate, and hit his way back up. Why not for the Tribe?
If you were Andy Marte, why would you stick with an organization that clearly has no faith in your ability when you could go to another organization where maybe you get coached a little differently? Maybe some organization can figure out how to get to Andy to shorten up his swing, or stop trying to pull everything? Maybe he’ll be more prone to listen to another team with another approach – it’s clear that whatever the Indians are doing to coach him up is not working – whether that’s Andy’s fault or the team’s approach is anybody’s guess.
by woodsmeister on Feb 19, 2009 4:43 PM EST up reply actions
whose to say that Marte blames the organization as so many people on LGT do. The guy played his way from super-prospect to irrelevant by any standard by getting worse in AAA ’06 and ’07. He STILL got 250 PAs at the big league level because of his pedigree and age, and was dominated by MLB pitching.
I don’t have a link, but my dad just told me he came to camp out of shape this year and he was gone. (My initial thought was- wow, there is going to be a 300 comment FanPost on this at LGT). Marte may be as disappointed with how his situation has turned out so far as anyone. But I don’t know if he will blame Wedge, Shapiro and the organization.
I think that it’s possible there were behind-the-scenes opportunities that Marte screwed up.
The final verdict will be the chances (if any) that come wherever he ends up.
Has he been outrighted before? If not, I don’t think he can refuse. (All this assuming no one else takes him).
Sorry, I was answering your question on why the Indians might want that. I have no idea what Andy thinks.
Additionally, I think the Indians would prefer to see Wes Hodges playing 3B everyday at Columbus; while Hodges isn’t a stellar prospect, he arguably has as much or more of a chance of being a quality ML player as Marte, being that Marte is now 25-YO and has not been able to adjust to ML pitching to this point (partly the Indians’ fault and partly his own).
The Indians wouldn’t want Marte blocking Hodges – essentially, the connection between the two has now been severed. Besides that, someone is likely to pick him up off of waivers, I’m sure. He has virtually no chance of coming to Columbus.
Just my 2 cents.
The "cream of the crop" doesn't always rise to the top.
This is the Columbus crunch:
1B – Brown and Aubrey
2B – Valbuena and Barfield, but Barfield likely will be in Cleveland
SS – Josh Rodriguez and some minor league signing
3B – Hodges and Marte, but Marte probably won’t clear waivers.
C – Toregas and Gimenez
Now, some of these guys can get time at DH, but not all of them. If Marte somehow cleared waivers, you have to wonder if they’d have him and Marte splitting all the 3B time, 30% of the 1B time, and most of the DH time, to get them both playing 5-6 times a week. That leaves less time for Toregas and Gimenez, but Gimenez can spend a little time in the outfield. Mainly, though, it probably means releasing Aubrey.
Hello Jay,
Good point – I could see that if Marte somehow clears waivers (which I also doubt) – since there is question over whether Hodges can truly man 3B or not, I could see where he would shift between 3B/1B/DH, which would potentially open up at least a part-time spot for Marte.
If it means letting go of Aubrey, the Indians MIGHT do it, only because Marte at least showed the ability to hit at AAA at one time; Aubrey never has because Aubrey can’t stay healthy enough to be able to progress through the Minors (another positive for Marte – he has been relatively healthy, outside of the ML injury in 2007, which is all the more reason why his play has been frustrating).
The "cream of the crop" doesn't always rise to the top.
As everyone has said … we knew it would end like this, but it still stings.
Let’s hope he doesn’t end up with an AL squad AND comes back to haunt us. If he goes to the NL and succeeds, so be it.
dude, he’s going to suck for at least another five years, float around in the minors and then pop up for and dominate for couple years. That or we all find out that he was actually 29 years old when we traded for him.
As mentioned in an earlier post, he reminds me a bit of Wes Helms, who was a hot prospect at one time, even hitting 23 HRS for Milwaukee in 2003. Ironically, he too started as a 3B in the Atlanta system, but he’s been more of a role-bench player, and has only shown sporadic displays of solid ability.
I think this may be what happens with Marte, perhaps with a bit more power (20-25, maybe one season perhaps where he makes a shot at 30 if he gets enough playing time), but not hitting at or near .300 like Helms did in 2005 and 2006. I think Marte may settle somewhere in the .220 to maybe .270 range, at best, especially if the team or teams put Marte in the best matchups possible for him (against LHP mostly, I think).
Just my 2 cents.
The "cream of the crop" doesn't always rise to the top.
There are few if any subjects on LGT since I’ve been here (late 2006) that have had more posts devoted to them than Andy Marte. I think at this point it’s the reason we’re seeing so many single line reactions to the story. We’ve just talked it all out.
Steel Nick
so, god forbid derosa breaks his leg first game of the WBC. barfield is are starting 2B and we make the square peg shift?
barfield is are starting 2B
I don’t no about that.
Steel Nick
by nickjs21 on Feb 19, 2009 5:16 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
They might mix it up, which I wouldn’t like, or they might just make The Shift.
Seems to me I have a good 2000-word conversation on this very subject with Antonetti. Guess I’ll just wait for an injury to happen and then post it.
This is like dating a hot girl who just graduated at the top of her college class with a business degree. Then you “take a break” to make sure you’re over your ex, who is chronically unemployed, alcoholic, but gets stuck in your brain. You mess around with the ex for six months, then you swear it’s over, and you tell the new girl you want to give it an honest chance. Then you spend the next two months canceling half your dinner dates and generally ignoring her. When you do make time for her, she’s stressed out and wondering if you’re really that into her. Meanwhile, all of your friends say things like, “Boy, she’s a letdown, huh?” And you’re all, “Well, I don’t want to cut her loose before I make sure it’s not meant to be.”
Finally you call her and say, “It’s not me, it’s you.” You break it off. Years later you realize it was you, but hey, dime a dozen, right?
by tabler84 on Feb 19, 2009 4:43 PM EST reply actions 5 recs
Wow. I think we’ve all found a little window into Evan’s soul.
I'm *always* in the driver's seat, cugino -- Chuck
by Turkmenbashi on Feb 19, 2009 5:02 PM EST up reply actions
Well that’s good
I'm *always* in the driver's seat, cugino -- Chuck
by Turkmenbashi on Feb 19, 2009 5:15 PM EST up reply actions
but you missed that chance and only realized she was the right one when she called you from a pier in Alaska to tell you that she’s about to board a boat for a year-long Greenpeace mission.
then tells you that you don’t know how to treat a piece of stuff on the ground and slammed the phone down shattering it into a million pieces.
I have no idea what that first part is about.
That second part is true, but not about the girl I married. Still one of my dating moments.
cool, now i feel i can come back here and actually talk, now that i wont get hounded for my belief that andy marte is worthless.
I’ve been lurking behind him. Marte’s worth or worthlessness is not affected by whether he’s an Indian. My guess is he’ll be a major league player somewhere in a couple of years. Unlike Dellucci.
Now that’s an interesting comment. They could have cut Dellucci instead with no difference in cost, that is true.
I kind of like Salas. He’s not a great pitcher by any means, and he’s already 30-years old, but he throws a pretty good low to mid 90’s cutter to go along with a solid slider.
Too bad Marte didn’t work out. I had very high hopes (as we all did), so hopefully he’ll do well for another team.
As mentioned above, Salas didn’t start pitching until he was 25-YO, so it’s not overly surprising to see where he hasn’t established himself yet at the ML level. Combine that with above-average stuff, and I agree that I think he’s worth the risk – if he turns out, you have another potentially dominant reliever along with Miller, Meloan, and Sipp between AAA and MLB – you can never have enough of those in my opinion. :-)
The "cream of the crop" doesn't always rise to the top.
Good point – I had forgotten about that (still not used to the changes or putting “2 & 2” together when it comes to the new coaches and players – still have to learn that Isaac is no longer there and Hernandez is. When was the last time we had to learn a new bullpen coach is here? :-)
The "cream of the crop" doesn't always rise to the top.
I agree with those of you who think he really was never given a legitimate shot. The poor performance at Triple A the second time around was troubling, but I can’t help seeing that and other similarities to the Brandon Phillips fiasco. Marte is the second centerpiece of a major trade to have been quarantined prematurely (IMHO). Two does not make a pattern, but it does make me wonder – is there some systematic flaw in the Tribe’s method of integrating top position prospects coming in from other organizations?? If injury hadn’t led to Shoppach getting increased playing time, I wonder where we would be with him right now?? It will be interesting to see how things develop with LaPorta and Brantley.
I realize the timing stinks, but remember how Garko tanked in AAA before he got a prolonged look in Cleveland. At the time, we all went “I guess he was just bored in AAA.”
-Erik
i don’t know…grady and cliff seemed to progress through the minors pretty well.
unless your point is that only the upper levels of our minor league system are struggling w/ other prospects?
by DontCallMeJoey on Feb 19, 2009 4:58 PM EST up reply actions
this is nothing but cherry picking. phillips + guthrie + marte, etc = organizational flaw. but sizemore + fausto + asdrubal + lee + shoppach, etc = they just got lucky??*
*extra question mark added for emphasis.
I think he’s just noting that the “centerpieces,” the guys we were most excited about when these big trades went down, have not panned out. Grady, Lee, and Shoppach were not the headliners. He’s wondering if there’s something different in the way the organization deals with the big chips. I think it’s a legitimate question.
Shapiro has said on numerous occasions that Grady was one of the headliners to him. Does it surprise you that Hoynes didn’t cover it that way?
“Headliners” is a little strong. I think it’s fair to say that BP was player #1, Lee was #1A, and Grady was #3 but definitely more than a throw-in.
The Indians were quite excited by Sizemore’s potential when they made that trade – I think there were some analysts who thought that Sizemore could turn out to be the “best player of the bunch,” and that was presuming Phillips lived up to his potential; Grady’s potential was quite huge (and Montreal was facing contraction, so they were willing to give up prime talent to acquire Colon).
The "cream of the crop" doesn't always rise to the top.
definitely more than a throw-in
Kinda like Brantley? I kid. Kinda.
by Ryan Kelsey on Feb 19, 2009 11:59 PM EST up reply actions
It is kind of like Brantley, but you have to adjust to scale. We got more for Colon than we did for Sabathia, there’s no doubt. The Expos were facing contraction, and Minaya is kind of a dunce, and big-league GMs simply value upper-minors talent a lot more now than it did in 2002. Nobody is ever going to match that haul in terms of how the target and the returning prospects were valued at the time.
That’s why I think Montreal was willing to give up on Sizemore at the time; if they hadn’t been facing contraction, I’m not sure they would have been willing to give up all three prospects for Colon:
Phillips was projected to be a star and stud defender;
Lee was projected to be a very good #2, a frontline starter.
Sizemore was oozing athletic ability and was quite young, along with not having a tremendous amount of baseball experience (mostly football).
Nowadays, you might get 2 of the three for the same type of pitcher Colon was then, maybe, but the third prospect (presuming you get one) would likely be a low-level to mid-level decent prospect, but not one oozing ability like Sizemore was showing.
Just my 2 cents.
The "cream of the crop" doesn't always rise to the top.
I think the Sabathia deal proves that you don’t even get two of the three. I like Brantley a lot, but he doesn’t compare to Cliff Lee as the #2 guy in the deal — Cliff was considered the best or second-best lefty starter in the high minors, among all teams. And needless to say, Zachson and Bryson don’t add up to Sizemore, even at his 2002 appraisal value.
Seriously, I don’t get why Marte is such a lightning rod for criticism.
Regardless of how you feel about Marte’s future chances to be a star/regular in the majors, that trade really boils down to the Tribe getting Shoppach and the Red Sox getting less-than-stellar perfomance from Coco Crisp. It still means we got the better end of that trade.
Yes, welcome.
Throw a rock in here and you’ll hit someone else who thought Marte was the future.
Don’t throw rocks, though, please.
of course we all now recognize that this is the actual future:
by still ill on Feb 19, 2009 5:58 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I like that we’re building a theme, though
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Feb 19, 2009 7:09 PM EST up reply actions
Ha, a funny nickname for Meloan would be “Subpri.”
by SuddenSam on Feb 19, 2009 6:35 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I think they want to let him settle back in as a reliever for at least a little while. Bottom line, though, you’re going to go through 12-20 relievers in a season, and if you can stash some big-league relievers in the minors to start the year, that’s what you want to do.
I have this impression of 2005 that the ‘pen was so good that this wasn’t even close to true. I waited ages for K-brera to get a callup, and it didn’t happen until Rhodes’s kid got sick.
This probably isn’t true, but I don’t want the truth to ruin how invincible they seemed.
Though I look right at home, I still feel like an exile
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Feb 20, 2009 12:49 PM EST up reply actions
Obviously, it does nothing to take away from your actual point. We’ll see Meloan, Rundles, and Salas and probably all before June.
Though I look right at home, I still feel like an exile
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Feb 20, 2009 3:18 PM EST up reply actions
I come to this board several times a day but rarely post because I usually don’t have a strong enough opinion about the subject or because I don’t feel I have anything additional to offer.
But I’ve been shocked to read, in the past and today, the comments about Andy Marte from some of the most educated baseball fans out there. I have no idea how anyone could say that Marte, whether he is deemed to have been given a fair opportunity or not, was or is anything close to a viable major league baseball player. Especially on a contending team.
Part of the reason he wasn’t given what some would consider to be a fair opportunity to stick in the majors is that he never did anything to prove that he should. He swings that extremely heavy bat, which lumbers (no pun intended) through the hitting zone, usually resulting in a weak fly ball to left field. Through his three seasons in Cleveland, I never saw him make an adjustment — and if he was never asked to, that’s the fault of the hitting coach.
I haven’t read through all the posts on this thread because I’m on my way out the door, but Toxicdam is the most sensible poster I’ve seen. I don’t agree with all of his sub-points about Marte, but I don’t think it’s even possible to disagree with his fundamental point, which is that Marte failed in every single opportunity he had to earn a spot on the 25-man roster.
Yeah, he hit .291 in the last month. But that was his BEST stretch. Ever.
I assume when you are referring to 3 years time, you are talking about Marte’s whopping 456 major league at bats in that time span.
I am trying to search for Jay’s writeup on this from last season, but can’t find it at the moment. I think it will help you understand what we are taking issue with, and it is not whether or not we think Andy will be good, just that he warranted a bigger chance because of his incredible minor league seasons at a young age.
I was able to find Adam’s write up.
Yes, the organization bears a great deal of the blame in Marte’s failure to launch. But the bottom line is this: whatever Andy Marte was when he was 20, he no longer is.
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Feb 19, 2009 7:23 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Clearly. The problem some of us have is that we think the organization’s management of him contributed to the downfall
I still think the talent is there and that a fresh start is necessary. Meaning another team
I’m just not sure the talent is still there. I definitely think it was there…
by APV on Feb 19, 2009 7:29 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
you have to understand that over the course of 3 years, Andy Marte had 495 plate appearances…in 2008 Grady Sizemore had 745.
to say he failed in every single opportunity is silly if you don’t qualify the opportunities he was given.
by DontCallMeJoey on Feb 19, 2009 7:14 PM EST up reply actions
true enough…but the .309 OBP in his 3rd year of AAA seems like a “regression” year. isn’t the more important number the .372 OBP he put up in his first year of AAA, his only “full” year there, at age 21? considering that performance, 495 PA in the bigs in 3 years seems pretty paltry.
by DontCallMeJoey on Feb 19, 2009 7:45 PM EST up reply actions
if you’re asking me whether the more important number is the one he put up 2-years ago or the one he put up 4-years ago, I’m going to say the former
There are legitimate reasons to take either Year 1 or Year 3 more seriously.
In trying to look at it in a balanced way, I look at the three-year total, which is: .268 / .337 / .473 = 810 OPS.
For a 22-year-old (21, 22, 23) plus-defender at third base, those are very good Triple-A numbers. Wes Hodges put up those numbers at age 23 in Double-A at an “old” 23, and his defense is lousy from all reports. If he’s a prospect at all, then Andy Marte was still a very good prospect at the start of 2008.
Whatever anyone thinks of him, he clearly was not treated like a “very good prospect” in 2008.
by Jay on Feb 19, 2009 8:11 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
I think, even in looking at the minor league numbers, you have to weight the more recent numbers more strongly. He put up decent power numbers in Buffalo, but his .322 and .309 OBP are clearly different than the .372 he put up with the Braves. I don’t know what happened to his plate discipline, but it never showed up in Cleveland, which made him a much different hitter, and one with a significantly lower probability of succeeding in the bigs.
by APV on Feb 19, 2009 8:16 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
We disagree on this. For one thing, though we tend to take one-year minor league numbers more seriously than one-year major league numbers, that’s strictly out of necessity; the same variance issues do apply. We have a 1000+ sample of PA to look at, and looking at one-third of it is less useful by definition; we know that a 350 PA sample is inadequate.
For another, there were extenuating circumstances in years two and three. Marte had a difficult mental adjustment after being traded twice in the same offseason; he struggled mightily in April and May of 2006 but was very much the 2005 version of himself after that. In 2007, he was demoted after three weeks on the DL and one week on the bench, and there’s no way of knowing if he continued to battle minor injury-related issues after that point. If he was a “different hitter” (a lesser one) in those two seasons, it’s overwhelmingly likely that it was because of temporary factors, not permanent ones.
Bottom line, though, is that the 1000+ PA sample is inherently superior, and lacking any good reason to discount it, we should count it.
by Jay on Feb 19, 2009 8:26 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I don’t know where you are getting your numbers. In 2006 he struggled in April and May, had a huge June (1.028 OPS), then sucked again the rest of the season. Even in June, his OBP was under .360. In 2007 the only good month he had in Buffalo was August. I think it is always important to put numbers into context, and I can’t say that I’m always going to be consistent in how I do that. But he has never shown in Cleveland (or Buffalo) the ability he showed in the Atlanta organization.
by APV on Feb 19, 2009 8:33 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I don’t know where you’re getting your numbers, but I think you will find that after June, Marte spent almost the whole rest of the 2006 season in the majors, putting up mediocre numbers, but just fine for a 22-year-old rookie. You say his best month in 2007 was in August. That would seem to support my point rather than refuting it.
by Jay on Feb 19, 2009 8:56 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I don’t know. After June in 2006 he put up a .292 OBP in the minors and a .287 OBP in the majors. That’s quite a distance from the .372 OBP he put up in Richmond the year before. I’m telling you, at no point with Cleveland did he ever show the ability he showed coming up with Atlanta. I think there were clearly points where Cleveland should have shown him more support, but…he never, ever, forced them to do it. And going back to your post from last May, I was pissed the Indians weren’t playing him, but I now think that is evidence the Indians weren’t happy with what they were seeing with him on a daily basis in the cages, on the practice field, in the locker room. What can you do?
by APV on Feb 19, 2009 9:04 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
as far as his treatment is concerned, let’s even throw out 2008…maybe he never should have been given an opportunity to play in ‘08, considering his OBP in AAA in Buf was .309 in ’07 (not a point i concede, but i’ll stipulate for now).
in 2005, as has been noted, he posted .275 / .372 / .506 = 878 OPS as a 21 year old. over the course of the next 2 years he was granted 238 PA in the bigs.
maybe he sucks…maybe ’07 – ’08 was a true indication of who he is, and ’05 was actually the aberration. while unlikely, the point is that the org never gave him (or themselves) that opportunity to figure out which was which.
by DontCallMeJoey on Feb 19, 2009 8:42 PM EST up reply actions
oh snap
I'm *always* in the driver's seat, cugino -- Chuck
by Turkmenbashi on Feb 20, 2009 2:59 PM EST up reply actions
Hi jeff,
Thank you for the compliment. Marte is a football that’s been kicked around here too many times. You could literally turn this thread into 1000 comments if both sides wanted to. I’m just glad he is finally gone and he can’t be kicked around anymore.
Jeff, I’m going to try not to be harsh about this.
If judging a guy based on his batting average over 100 sporadic at-bats wasn’t an idiotic thing to do, then you would have a good point.
Since that is actually an idiotic thing to do, you do not have a good point.
I may have accidentally been harsh about this. Sorry.
Jay, you’re too nice. If this is the best you can do in an attempt (or non-attempt) to summon up some harshness, then you just need to try a little harder.
Cherry picking a throwaway sentence of a relatively long post which really had nothing to do with my overall argument is also a little bit idiotic. But hey, it’s your board.
The overall argument, of course, is that Andy Marte is a bad, bad major league baseball player. How anyone can disagree with that is beyond me. I couldn’t care less about his batting average in September, but it has been used by some, not necessarily on this board, to indicate that he actually has some value.
He doesn’t. He was let go in favor of a journeyman, performance-enhancing reliever who won’t make the opening day roster.
by jefftribe on Feb 19, 2009 8:52 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I think the point, Jeff, is that we do not, in fact, know whether Marte is a good or bad major league baseball player. We never offered enough opportunities to be able to establish that verdict.
-Erik
And my point is that he wasn’t given sufficient opportunities because he never showed even a glimmer of evidence that he had earned or deserved them. That’s where this argument gets stuck, though, and those of us on either side of the argument must just agree to disagree.
Jay, you called me an idiot once, and that’s all cool. But is there really a need to continue to talk down to me? We disagree. Big deal.
I understand that at least two people who are paid to evaluate talent decided that Marte is not a capable or worthy major league baseball player. I don’t blindly support every decision Wedge and Shapiro collectively make, but I think they got this one about 2 million percent right.
As drerikbrady indicates, the point is that we never got the data to judge Marte’s potential as a major leaguer.
I wasn’t cherrypicking the one sentence. Rather, that one sentence is typical of your whole approach to evaluating a player. Marte got several hundred big-league at-bats, spread out over four years. There is no competent MLB executive, or baseball analyst in general, that would say that we’ve got enough data on Marte as a major league hitter to judge him. Even the data we do have is misleading, because his playing time was awarded far less consistently than one would guess on a casual glance.
APV’s point about the 2007 minor league stats, though I disagree with it, is a far better argument.
I think, overwhelmingly, people here do not evaluate player’s swings, tools, etc. If they do, it’s lighthearted, and very grain of salt. So, nobody is going to get behind the “trust your eyes” argument. It’s not what we do. Big time evaluators said he was good, the numbers said he was good, so we thought he deserved a shot. Watching 459 at bats, on television, with no knowledge of the coaching going on, wasn’t going to change that.
I value the numbers as much as anyone, but those have dropped off as well, obviously. And since I never saw Marte when he was building his reputation and putting up those nice minor-league numbers, I’m afraid I do have to go with the “trust your eyes” argument on this rare occasion. It may be weak and lame, but it’s the one that I’m trusting the most.
We touched on this last spring. When a guy hasn’t had a chance to settle in, you’re going to see that not just in the numbers, but also in the visual observation. So even if you’re going to go with your own eyes, you have to consider that he was sitting for a week at a time, then getting one start, three plate appearances but asked to bunt in one of them, then removed for a pinch-hitter, etc. If he’d gotten more playing time, maybe he’d have started to hit better — and we’d have seen that result not just in the numbers, but with our eyes as well.
Even at the end of the season, he was only getting 70% of the playing time at best. Maybe you’re going to tell me that after the Indians had been out of the race for months, traded C.C. and Byrd and Blake, you continued to monitor Marte very carefully, to watch for signs that his swing was good or bad. I am deeply skeptical that anyone here actually was doing that.
You’re right. I didn’t do that. My job made me unable to watch most games live, and when I caught them on DVR, it was usually only to watch Mr. Lee.
Numbers are actually way more important to me than the eye test, because I’m admittedly not the best evaluator of the less-obvious tools, even though I’ve seen hundreds and hundreds of games in my life. When you’ve done the eye test for so long, it’s difficult to make the transition to valuing statistics more. But I’m getting there.
Marte’s performance, whether his fault or not (and I realize ‘fault’ isn’t the best choice of words) was too difficult to ignore, for me, with the eye test. I never saw anything that made me believe he could be a valuable part of a contending team. Of course, that is just my opinion. I have and did read the Marte write-up from last season, but it didn’t and hasn’t swayed me.
Fair enough. I too intuitively trust my eyes while I’m watching a game, but I would never make decisions based on them.
Out of curiosity, did you have an impression of Marte’s defense, specifically in 2008?
Defense is that tool I’m not as well-versed in, as far as statistics go. I can usually tell when someone has poor feet or range, but not always when a guy has good range. But I think Marte is strong defensively, which has caused me to wish he could play another position and we could keep him around as a utility guy. I can’t say he’s completely hopeless, just that I haven’t seen anything to make me the slightest bit hopeful. Drerik’s point below me is a good one.
You know what? I agree, I never saw anything that made me believe that he could be a valuable part of a contending team. But I never saw the converse either, ie., nothing that absolutely convinced me that he was worthless. Because he never played enough at this level to make a definitive evaluation. Every time we turned around he was sacrificing someone over to second or being lifted for a pinch hitter in the once a week or so that they got him off the bench.
-Erik
by drerikbrady on Feb 19, 2009 10:23 PM EST up reply actions
Grady looks terrible when he strikes out. I’m not trying to be snarky; if I was some kind of advance scout and I saw Sizemore strike out 3 times, I’m not sure I’d notice that he was potentially the best player in baseball.
by afh4 on Feb 19, 2009 10:29 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
But he looks like an Adonis when he hits a HR, as if chizzled from marble and blessed by Zeus himself.
Andy Marte didn’t look like that my friend, not at all.
I want to restate my hope that Marte Par-tays officially be replaced by Shin-Soo shin-digs
by APV on Feb 19, 2009 6:58 PM EST reply actions 5 recs
I’m afraid you are mistaken, my friend. Whereas partays may require an RSVP, shindigs are spontaneous and open to all.
by APV on Feb 19, 2009 7:02 PM EST up reply actions 3 recs
I think this ultimately identifies Marte’s real failure. No one ever RSVPed.
by APV on Feb 20, 2009 3:13 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
I’m hosting a Firefly marathon next weekend.
You’re not invited — I just thought I’d let you know so you felt like you were missing something.
by Logodaedalus on Feb 19, 2009 11:30 PM EST up reply actions
Thanks; now I feel left out. God, I loved Firefly…
Commissioner of the Planetary Extreme Baseball Alliance (PEBA)
OOTP baseball sim league composed of LGT regulars
Check us out @ http://peba.allsimbaseball3.com
This? This is what you speak up about? Your fantasy league and Firefly?
Bah.
by Jay on Feb 20, 2009 3:17 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
Oh god yes
I'm *always* in the driver's seat, cugino -- Chuck
by Turkmenbashi on Feb 20, 2009 3:07 PM EST up reply actions
Huh.
Well at least we designated him now and not after he somehow pulls off a monster spring. I guess if we really do hope to sneak him through, this is the best time….after most teams have mostly finalized their rosters (some exceptions of course), but before he dominates the Cacti.
We really do need to link Jay’s post from last year, because all of this is really not worth discussing again, as nothing has changed on the subject. We all know where we stand.
Also worth noting that Andy just turned 25 even though it feels like he has been mired in crapiness for ages. Ben Francisco, who spent his first significant time in the majors last year is almost exactly 2 years older than Marte
Unlike Marte, Ben Francisco was able to make use of his limited windows of opportunity. Francisco didn’t go back to AAA and scuffle, he just kept hitting. Francisco didn’t show up to Spring Training and suck .. he performed pretty well.
Ben Francisco will have a better career than Andy Marte (however hollow a victory that may be). I would bet a lifetime ban on that.
This is the problem with the argument. Ben Francisco was able to get regular playing time in 2008 until being called up to the majors, which he indeed started out hitting well. However, to say he kept hitting is not entirely accurate. His numbers were less than stellar the latter half of his major league season
Ben came up and seized an opportunity. Ben came to spring training in 08 and hit .350. Ben was then unfairly sent back to AAA, yet he still hit in AAA. Ben came up and had a terrific first month or so.
Andy Marte has done none of that. He’s the ANTI-Ben Francisco.
See below. Francisco hit terribly in Buffalo last year and got called up anyway. That’s the reality, and what I wrote below actually understates how bad he was before his first callup.
Tox, we’ve been through this before. On certain topics like this, you just invent things that never happened. It won’t fly. Look up some facts before you post, and if you’re not willing to, maybe you should sit this topic out.
Ok, I slipped up and confused his 2007 performance for 2008. But the other facts remain. He came into Spring Training and destroyed baseballs .. Marte couldn’t break the Mendoza. He got called up and started hitting right out of the gate.
Those are definitive small sample opportunities that he took advantage of.
The fact that you’ve introduced the term “definitive small sample opportunities” into this discussion speaks for itself.
Getting a break into baseball has almost always been about small sample sizes. This isn’t jay vee ball.
by Toxicadam on Feb 19, 2009 9:53 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Prudence, patience and sometimes intelligence goes out the window when you are concerned about winning ball games and meeting expectations. It’s a performance based league, not a finishing school. Win or be fired.
by Toxicadam on Feb 19, 2009 10:07 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Again, this is just a bad philosophy for managing anything including an MLB club, and it’s not the Indians’ philosophy.
What is true is that sometimes clubs are FORCED into a situation where they have to make a decision based on less data than they’d like to have. The Indians felt this was one of those situations — they’d like to have more evidence that Marte stinks, but they didn’t feel they could afford to gather it, given that he was out of options and they had no other option at 3B. So they acquired DeRosa.
Now, having acquired DeRosa, they feel forced to use that roster spot more productively, adding depth to the bullpen, because they need option-able bullpen depth more than they need the depth at 3B.
Let’s see if there are any “intelligent GMs” out there willing to give Marte a spot on their 40 man.
Do you like apostrophes for plurals?
I prefer GMs to GM’s.
by JulioBernazard on Feb 19, 2009 11:59 PM EST up reply actions
Ben Fran’s spring training numbers are mostly irrelevant, a fact you are supporting by pointing out that the Indians still put him in AAA after “destroying baseballs.” I put it in quotes because a .350 BA gives me no context on what kind of power he was hitting for or if he was hitting anything other than singles with a little bit of BABIP fortune
Francisco, in fact, was sent to Buffalo to start the 2008 season, and put up a 656 OPS over four weeks, worse than Marte’s allegedly horrible seasons there.
So, you know … that’s “scuffling” for you … and that’s the kind of brilliant conclusion you get from 100 PA.
When you are competing for a pennant and every game matters, many choices are made via SSS. That’s just baseball, Jay.
Thank you for teaching me about baseball.
The fact is, as the Indians well know, the more decisions you make based on small sample size, the worse your decisions will be.
The Indians didn’t make this decision based on a couple hundred at-bats.
Anyway, bottom line is, your position is that based on those 100 PA in Buffalo, they should never have promoted Francisco last year.
My position is that when given small opportunities at the major league level, Francisco stepped up and performed … exceptionally. That’s why he still has a job and Marte doesn’t.
Your definition of exceptional is way different than mine. 100 OPS+ for a corner outfielder. OBP .332. The word I would have used is mediocre
He meant for the first few days, which is something Marte never could do. At least, that’s what I thought he meant.
I see, my mistake. If the first week of the season is the most important determining factor, Chris Shelton would be in the Hall of Fame. Turns out the Tigers didn’t even hold onto him
Tox wants to make sure we notice that Ben’s nice early-season numbers were based on an unsustainable .386 BABIP.
You’re right, they should have benched him immediately. How dare he make contact. The nerve of the guy. He should have flailed around at pitches or jumped at the first pitch thrown at him like Marte did for his three years here.
by Toxicadam on Feb 19, 2009 10:26 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Do you actually not know what BABIP is?
Or do you think you can misrepresent my point and actually fool anyone?
Let’s review what was said:
My position is that when given small opportunities at the major league level, Francisco stepped up and performed … exceptionally. That’s why he still has a job and Marte doesn’t
I did not say that Ben Francisco is a 100 OPS hitter. I did not say that Ben Francisco is even a league average player. I said that he performed when called upon. Both in-season and out of season. Andy Marte did not.
So, you’re the one putting words into my mouth..
by Toxicadam on Feb 19, 2009 10:33 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I was attempting to test your logic to see if it would hold up, not to put words in your mouth.
In any event, the literal and specific meaning of your words is simply wrong. Francisco has a job instead of Marte for many reasons, some in the numbers and some not, but performing well over a few days is not one of those reasons. Among the real reasons would be team need and organizational depth at specific positions and simple option status. If Marte had an option left, they’d have found room on the 40-man for him.
I would speculate that another reason is simply that Wedge was willing to play Francisco at almost any time and was almost never willing to play Marte. Regardless of whether Marte would have played better, there’s just no reason for a front office to keep a player that the manager refuses to use. That is, in fact, the most significant thing that we know about Marte that we didn’t know a year ago.
It wasn’t a few days Jay. It was for 29 games. It was during a time where almost the whole team was floundering at the plate. You know, around the same time Marte was batting about .160 with a SLG percentage to match?
by Toxicadam on Feb 19, 2009 10:44 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
The main difference between Andy and Ben during that period was that one of them got 118 PA in the majors after playing every day for three weeks in the minors, while the other got 40 PA in the majors after getting 8 PA — 8! — in the previous three weeks.
We aren’t ever going to know what would have happened had their positions been reversed. What we do know is that no major league executive — and specifically not the Indians — would evaluate a player’s potential based on that.
You might, but they wouldn’t, and they didn’t.
No they wouldn’t evaluate him based on those opportunities. But give him the a share of finite PAs over a period in time when a supposedly contending team was hitting poorly and in SSS said player wasn’t hitting well wasn’t going to happen if winning games was the supreme priority of the team at that time, not evaluation. His development was so poorly handled in addition to his own failures to develop (I’d point to his poor AAA numbers as a Bison as evidence that he may not have taken his development that seriously), to the point where like APV stated above, this guy probably isn’t that talented anymore.
I disagree, only because there were so few PA for Marte at that point that they really did mean nothing — they weren’t unreliable, they were totally meaningless. The best hitter in the world can look bad for 12 PA, that’s just three games!
Remember too that if you plug in Marte at 3B and Blake in the outfield, you’re getting a defensive upgrade at two positions. So if nothing else, the hitting would have stayed the same (terrible) and the defense would have been better.
More to the point, Marte simply would not have been on the roster had he not been seen by the front office as a viable option in the event half the lineup is terrible. The way he was used, we’d have been better off with a third catcher or a pure-speed guy. That cannot have been the front office’s intent.
Hello Jay,
As mentioned in one of my posts above, it seems to me that Wedge gets an “impression” of a player the way he comes out of the gate to start the season – if he excels, he’ll likely get more chances (Cabrera, Francisco, Choo, Gutierrez, etc.); if he doesn’t, then it seems that he’s in Wedge’s doghouse (Phillps, Marte, etc.) and it’s extremely difficult to get out of that doghouse (mostly because you have few chances to “redeem” yourself after you failed to initially impress Wedge).
That just seems like the pattern I’m reading from Wedge’s actions over his tenure as Indians’ manager – maybe I’m reading too much into it.
Just my 2 cents.
The "cream of the crop" doesn't always rise to the top.
While we’re into SSSes,
http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/CLE/CLE200706290.shtml
Travis Hafner is overrated. Clarity is underrated. David Dellucci is David Dellucci.
Ooh, that was the game Chuck took me and Dave too. Good times.
I'm *always* in the driver's seat, cugino -- Chuck
by Turkmenbashi on Feb 20, 2009 3:46 PM EST up reply actions
Dave’s right. The game we went to was the one Shoppach caught and broke the bat over his knee after his third K. My kid asked me if he did that after every strike out. I said, “no” and he said, “good, I don’t think that they can afford to buy that many new bats”. The kid’s a prodigy, I tell ya.
Haha yeah, you guys are right. I went to both of these games, and I got them confused.
I'm *always* in the driver's seat, cugino -- Chuck
by Turkmenbashi on Feb 20, 2009 6:24 PM EST up reply actions
And my point is that after those handful of games, Francisco was pretty lousy for many dozens of games, same pattern, two years in a row. Some guys start hot, some guys start cool. If the season were one week long, that would be a good way to make decisions, but it isn’t.
Blake actually took a very long time to develop, and Garko ends up supporting my point — he showed us more of the “range” of his potential in his second full season. The more we see, the more we know.
Peralta is a freak. I have trouble seeing him as typical of anything.
The real point is that if you lined up all major leaguers and showed their first-week stats and compared with the overall quality of their careers, you’d see little if any correlation at all.
All right, time for an over/under on comments in this thread. Think we’ve said all there is to say on Marte? Well, I’m setting the line at 4,280 comments. And I’m taking the over.
Under… because nobody’s computer would be alive in a 4000 comment thread.
Travis Hafner is overrated. Clarity is underrated. David Dellucci is David Dellucci.
by westbrook on Feb 19, 2009 8:24 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I also have to say “under” for two main reasons:
1. I don’t know if Jay/Ryan/Adam/Andrew will allow this thread to continue verbatim for that long (I’m not saying they don’t like good discourse, but eventually, a topic wears itself out in terms of providing new perspectives).
2. Even if #1 doesn’t come to pass (i.e. more new perspectives can be provided), it’s likely they’ll create a second/continued thread before we reach the 4,280 comment mark in this thread.
Just my 2 cents. :-)
The "cream of the crop" doesn't always rise to the top.
Can we get a countdown clock on the front page until the time we can send him to AAA>
Travis Hafner is overrated. Clarity is underrated. David Dellucci is David Dellucci.
What would he do in AAA? Don’t the Indians want Hodges to play every day at 3B in Columbus? It seems as though sending him down would create a problem similar to what would happen if Barfield got sent down. I just don’t see where he would play unless he was a DH. The Braves decided that he had outgrown SS as soon as they signed him.
"I've never complained about it. I'm thankful to have a jersey." Mark DeRosa, 22 Aug 2007
General note (and somewhat self-serving).
There’s been a good half-dozen references to my articles last year on this subject, and asking for links. There actually have been links to all of them since the moment this thread was posted. On the sidebar near the top are three boxes in succession: Related Stories on Let’s Go Tribe, Related FanPosts, and Related FanShots. Oh, the magic of a good tagging system!
It happens that “Related Stories” links to five articles, all written by me, all from mid-May to mid-June of last season. You might want to take a look at not just the “Marte Sits” article, but also the “Week In Review” that was written basically on the same day, to get an idea of the context.
Wait, you mean it’s the tags that determine what goes there? I always assumed the site used some sort of factor analysis, or maybe a neural network…
by Logodaedalus on Feb 19, 2009 9:02 PM EST up reply actions
Does this mean they have to make space for a new mural in Goodyear?
by APV on Feb 19, 2009 9:10 PM EST reply actions 4 recs
I don’t really feel that strongly about this, either way. Marte did not get a chance to prove himself at the major league level. There is just no way around this, he didn’t. However, the Indians didn’t feel like that they needed to see what he could do, as they must have seen enough at AAA, in the cages, spring training, etc to think they had an approximation of his talents. I wish they would have let Marte try to prove them wrong, as they didn’t have much to lose and had much more to gain, but as I said, I don’t really care. I’m not sure why I don’t care, I just don’t.
I basically agree with all of this — and I don’t care either. The reason I don’t care I suspect is the same as yours — we’re just too tired of it to care, and we recognize that Marte won’t ever get his shot as an Indian under any circumstances.
The only thing I do still care about is people mis-representing the record on Marte or other players. If we’re going to discuss Marte, we’re going to use the real facts and the proper context. Convenient distortions and “mis-remembering” belong on other forums, not this one.
by Jay on Feb 19, 2009 9:45 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
My question: what is the private or real Shapiro/Antonelli answer to why Marte never received a real shot in the majors? Do they have data indicating Marte is not going to be a good major league ball player, data we’re not aware of? Or would their real reasons for dumping Marte look like the reasons given by those on this board who favor getting rid of him?
Or would they simply admit this was club mismanagement or error?
Sub-question (for Jay): did you have the opportunity to ask Mr. Antonelli for an explanation, and will I be able to read his answer in the MFP Indians Annual I hope will arrive in my mailbox shortly?
You bring up a point which I conveniently leave out when arguing for Marte and it is that the front office has access to scouting and data that we don’t. So yes, I trust their judgment based on track record for this reason. Unless someone here is claiming to have scouting skills beyond an amateur level, I just don’t think there is enough data or insight that this community has to say that Marte was not given a fair chance.
Knowing what is available, I would argue for Marte as well, and I don’t think front office is relying on the stats and crude impressions those arguing against Marte are relying upon, either. What I want to know is what do they see that you and I and the others on here who wanted to give Marte more time don’t?
I trust our front office to make the correct decision more often than not. Yet the case for Marte, based on the metrics we are accustomed to our front office using, seems so strong.
You’re conflating two totally different subjects. We know for a fact that he didn’t get a fair chance; it’s not subject to scouting, it’s a numbers question, and based on the Indians’ public statements. He did not have enough PA in the majors to get a really good read on him, but again, they have been forced to make decisions about Marte without as much data as they would like.
I did ask Antonetti about it, but we didn’t get a chance to discuss it in depth. It was the very last thing on my last of topics to discuss — because I considered it a dead issue, not at all timely, and more of a personal curiosity. Pavano got signed right before (practically during) our last session, and I felt it was more important to talk about Pavano issues than Marte issues.
In our brief talk, the gist was, basically, they haven’t seen him as much as they’d like, but then again there is no real magic threshold for having “enough” data in baseball. He did allow that Marte didn’t do himself any favors by not producing when he did get opportunities — my impression is that this was more about motivating Wedge to play him more than about the front office’s evaluation. But like I said, we didn’t really get a chance to talk about it in-depth.
this is why you are great
So 2009.
by Gradyforpresident on Feb 20, 2009 3:58 AM EST up reply actions
for the record i’m sober.
So 2009.
by Gradyforpresident on Feb 20, 2009 3:58 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Right on
I'm *always* in the driver's seat, cugino -- Chuck
by Turkmenbashi on Feb 20, 2009 3:49 PM EST up reply actions
WOW a man works all day Friday, clicks in for a quick look at LGT to see what is happening in the world of Indians baseball. Feel like I’ve missedf something.
One day I'll get over to watch the Tribe play
by new zealand tribe fan on Feb 19, 2009 11:40 PM EST reply actions
Double wow. A fella reaches the bottom of the Marte thread at 1:40 Friday AM, has his mind blown by the realization that, somewhere, Friday is already over. Back to the Future indeed.
by still ill on Feb 20, 2009 1:46 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
It’s hard to have any real opinion about Marte. I saw him play in person once – good D, loopy swing but he looked like he could drive a ball. Ya see him come up to the plate, ya wanna see him do well and he just doesn’t. Don’t know the reason for sure – looks like he may have a whole or two in his strike zone – looks like he’s lunging a little on the breakin’ pitch. But then again, I’ve seen other young players look the same, most notably Albert Belle and Jim Thome. So you think, “maybe he’ll come around”, only he doesn’t. Maybe more consistant playing time would help – maybe he’s 30 years old – who the hell knows? All I know is that he’s gone.
by mauichuck on Feb 20, 2009 12:15 AM EST reply actions 1 recs
And with that piece of (possibly ironic) rank stupidity, I’m cutting off this thread. 400 comments is enough, and I’m tired of loading this page.
Please feel free to continue any part of this discussion in the new thread. For example, I don’t think Grady’s swing is terribly compact, certainly not based on the strikeouts.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Featured Stories
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recent FanShots
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Does Billy Beane’s contract extension signal an optimistic dawn for Oakland fans?
- Ask Alex: Will Alex Avila be an All-Star again?
- Create-a-Caption: Matt Cain’s great pair of golf pants
- Kim Kardashian, Kris Humphries autographed ball being auctioned by Twins
- George Brett lawsuit claims his company falsely advertises ion necklaces’ health benefits
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
