Castrovince: Marte Clears Waivers
I might be on my own here, but I am happy about this. I wasn't quite ready to throw him away.
11 months ago
KevinV
216 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
I know he is not a very smart guy, but why wouldn’t Ed Wade be interested. He’s got 36 year old Geoff Blum slated to start there.
by ClarkM on Feb 25, 2009 3:10 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Maybe because Marte is not what you think he is.
by oxforddave on Feb 25, 2009 8:41 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
That’s the whole point, we don’t know what Marte is or Scott Moore for that matter, but there is a decent chance that either of them can match Blum’s production, and their upside is even greater. We know what Blum can do, he’s 37 and only under team control for one more year.
by ClarkM on Feb 26, 2009 1:05 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I had a feeling this would happen; didn’t want to jinx it. If Marte remains blocked from regular 3B duty by Hodges (a la Casey), I’m seriously going to flip out.
by jhon on Feb 25, 2009 3:18 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
start installing the padding in your room now
by APV on Feb 25, 2009 3:26 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Like Jay said in the other thread, ‘reps’ in the field aren’t really Marte’s problem. It’s getting ABs that he needs. So, between 1b, 3b, and DH, hopefully he can see enough plate time to see how his hitting approach comes along.
Signature to be named later.
by emd2k3 on Feb 25, 2009 3:26 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
At this point I want to see some PAs for forensic purposes at the very least. I don’t suppose to have any idea of what his big league future will be.
by jhon on Feb 25, 2009 5:25 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, I think I’d be more mad out if Marte took time away from Hodges.
by Ryan Kelsey on Feb 25, 2009 5:29 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, I don’t think there"s much possibility for Marte to take AAA playing time away from Hodges unless he (Hodges) really tanks this spring.
by PatBordersHelmet on Feb 25, 2009 6:58 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
What’s the bigger slap in the face for a former uber-prospect, being DFAed for a 30-year-old RP with limited big-league experience, or clearing waivers?
by JulioBernazard on Feb 25, 2009 3:32 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Good question. The first thought that crossed my mind was, “After this type of rejection, how can he face the rest of the team?”
Yankees and Red Sox - MLB's Axis of Evil
(And ESPN is right in the middle)
by Spidey on Feb 25, 2009 4:10 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Please, please, please! I hope karma works in our favor on this.
Yankees and Red Sox - MLB's Axis of Evil
(And ESPN is right in the middle)
by Spidey on Feb 25, 2009 4:13 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Hey this worked about the best possible way. Consistent at-bats in our AAA for Marte is exactly what he needs developmentally.
by hans on Feb 25, 2009 5:07 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
if we get a major league player out of Brown/Aubrey/Marte, I will be thrilled. Maybe we won’t. I just like knowing there’s a possibility.
by Brick. on Feb 25, 2009 5:23 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
would somebody fix it already? the yahoo people are watching us.
by emil minty on Feb 25, 2009 5:50 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Done. That was a particularly ugly typo.
by KevinV on Feb 25, 2009 6:02 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Somebody needs to FIX IT!
What was fixed?
by JulioBernazard on Feb 25, 2009 6:18 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
You guys are so out of your skull to think Marte deserves playing time over Hodges. The next Casey Blake? Really?
Marte is a bum and will be released by the middle of next year.
by Toxicadam on Feb 25, 2009 8:20 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
I think it’s just me.
I think Marte deserves a chance to play 3B somewhere, to settle once and for all whether he can truly cut it. I’m both grateful and exasperated that we still have him.
Look man, I’m actually pretty close to writing him off as a bum, but I just haven’t yet. I’ll find out this year one way or the other.
by jhon on Feb 25, 2009 9:40 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
That somewhere can be Kinston or some independent softball team, but its not going to be in Cleveland or Columbus, and it shouldn’t be. Look, we know he is a major league 3B with the glove. He just is pretty far from that with the bat. So, maybe he can get 250 ABs at DH, 1B and occasional 3B in C-Bus and look a little better doing it and finds his way to a nice AAAA/MLB bench player career.
Really, I don’t care. But, I don’t want it messing up any progress with Hodges or any other, even marginal, prospect. He is just above Aubrey and just below Jordan Brown in my mind of priorities amongst position players.
by Ryan Kelsey on Feb 25, 2009 10:09 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Being that we still have Marte (a bit surprising in my opinion, though maybe some of the places we’d thought would try him out, such as Pittsburgh, have other options, like Andy LaRoche, etc.), it would seem likely he’ll be moved around the field – 3B, 1B, DH – as has been suggested above.
Like it or not, Marte has stalled in the Minors; Hodges has not. Granted, Hodges is not a “spectacular” prospect, but unlike Marte, has not stalled, so why should Marte block Hodges’ path – we really don’t know what Hodges can do. Granted, you could make the same argument about Marte, but unlike Hodges, Marte did have some chances (albeit limited), so I think it stands to reason that Hodges has priority here, not Marte.
If Marte can turn out to be a useful player, or even come somewhat near where he was expected to be, that’s all the better, but the Indians are not going to let Marte stand in Hodges’ way, especially with the questions still surrounding Hodges. After all, Hodges was expected to be more than just a so-so prospect when he was drafted (he fell in the Draft due to an injury, not a lack of ability), so I’m sure the Indians will give him every opportunity to prove one way or the other whether he’s the real deal (good hitting, good defensive 3B) or a mirage (decent hitting, poor fielding 3B as he’s shown to be the past 1-2 seasons).
Just my 2 cents.
The "cream of the crop" doesn't always rise to the top.
by indiansfan on Feb 25, 2009 11:09 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
DD, with all due respect … do you actually know anything at all about Brown?
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Feb 25, 2009 11:16 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I’m as down on Marte as everybody, but that’s pretty extreme.
Though I look right at home, I still feel like an exile
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Feb 25, 2009 11:20 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
*anybody
Though I look right at home, I still feel like an exile
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Feb 25, 2009 11:20 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
He was so incredibly bad last year—proportionally worse than Garko even—going into a year when some of us were speculatively interested in him as a prospect.
by jhon on Feb 25, 2009 11:59 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Just to be clear, you mean Brown, right?
Though I look right at home, I still feel like an exile
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Feb 26, 2009 8:05 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Never mind, cleared up below.
Though I look right at home, I still feel like an exile
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Feb 26, 2009 8:06 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah- I know that he is a 1B. I know that he is one season removed from a really, really good year at AA at 23. I know he struggled last year in AAA with some injury issues and in his first year at that level. I know he relies a lot on batting average and that he doesn’t walk or strike out a ton. I know he hits quite a few doubles.
And really, that is just how far Marte has fallen in my eyes. I really don’t think Marte can put up a .750 OPS if given the chance—- in Columbus. Brown, in his second year, may be able to turn a couple of those doubles in to homers, adjust a little to the better pitching, stay healthy and get his AVG and therefore his OBP up 20 points or so.
Given that they are the same age, it looks, to me that its possible that 2008 was a hic-up on Brown’s path towards MLB mediocrity/Ben Francisco-ness. On the other hand, Marte’s career trajectory is spiraling towards something less than that.
by Ryan Kelsey on Feb 26, 2009 10:35 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I really don’t think Marte can put up a .750 OPS if given the chance—- in Columbus.
Despite the fact that in his worst year, he has never put up an OPS that low, at any level, including Triple-A? Why stop there? Why not say that he couldn’t put up a 750 in Lake County? Hell, why not Little League?
What looks like a trend over two seasons is statistical noise or external factors more often than not. The “death spiral” argument is an emotional one, not an analytical one. When people start arguing that Marte isn’t even a solid Triple-A player, it means only that reason has gone out the window entirely. And by the way, Aubrey and Brown are not solid Triple-A players, and Hodges is by no means a slam-dunk.
With Brown, you’re talking about a 1B prospect who has never slugged 500 at any age or level, despite always being a little old for his level. That one “really, really good year” was propped up by a .359 BAbip, and it included the lowest ISO of his career. At the time, it was reported that his knee was bothering him most of the year, but it now starts to look more like a chronic issue. (“Injuries are never a positive indicator.”)
The idea of comparing Marte with Aubrey and Brown has gotten way out of hand. They end up in similar situations with the Indians because of option status. Marte got outrighted because of his option status — he wasn’t going to make the 25-man roster. Aubrey got outrighted despite the fact that he had an option remaining — regardless of the 25-man roster, he wasn’t worth saving a spot on the 40-man. As for Brown, they were willing to lose him in the Rule 5 despite the fact that he’d have three options remaining if they added him. These situations are not equivalent, and the assumption that all three are in the same talent category is specious.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Feb 26, 2009 10:57 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Brown and Aubrey play checkers.
Signature to be named later.
by emd2k3 on Feb 26, 2009 11:03 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Despite the fact that in his worst year, he has never put up an OPS that low, at any level, including Triple-A?
I know you have all but excused his 250 PAs last year, but I don’t (not that I want to get into that conversation again). I don’t know what a .580 OPS translates to from the AL to AAA, but I don’t think it would make it to .750.
In the end, I don’t really care. I don’t see what the point in categorizing any of these guys are. That was the point of my original post- these players are non-entities to me. They will not contribute next year at the ML level- and if they do its because of injuries to at least two other guys.
by Ryan Kelsey on Feb 26, 2009 11:16 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, but again, it’s not like those 250 PA last year were all in a row or something. They were scattered and sparse, and indicative of nothing.
And even saying that gives unwarranted credence to the idea that 250 PA means anything at all, from any player.
I'm *always* in the driver's seat, cugino -- Chuck
by Turkmenbashi on Feb 26, 2009 1:59 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Like I said, I’d rather not see this debate again. I think 250 PAs is almost half a season. I also don’t care that they were scattered. He was in a bench role last year. He was going to get plate appearances when someone needed a day off and when something happened to the starter. He failed in that role. Miserably. Is that as important as his 750 PAs before that? No. But those weren’t all that much better, across AAA and Cleveland. Add it all up and you have 1000 PAs of data that say this is a guy not worth the space that he has taken up on LGT.
by Ryan Kelsey on Feb 26, 2009 2:51 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Nobody in the Indians organization would have said that it was reasonable for Marte to succeed in that role. In fact, they would have readily told you the opposite, that it’s an especially tough role for a young player to adjust to. He was not put in that position because he was a good fit for it, and his failure in that role has nothing to do with whether he could succeed in a different one.
In related news, Garko will not ever be a good left fielder. Should we therefore write him off completely as a first baseman? I’m no Garko booster, but a statement that extreme would be idiotic — as it is for Marte.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Feb 26, 2009 3:34 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Not quite sure that I get the Garko connection. Garko’s bat won’t play at 1B or LF in the longrun at last year’s levels. Marte’s bat won’t play at 3B or 1B or as a utility guy at last year’s levels.
by Ryan Kelsey on Feb 26, 2009 4:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
The connection is that based on team need as much as his own merits, Garko may be put in a position this season where he can’t perform at his own best. That is true of most players who aren’t given a starting job at their best defensive position. There are usually good reasons for it, but the point is that you don’t judge a guy’s overall abilities based on how he performs in what is, for him, a bad situation.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Feb 26, 2009 6:33 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
oh, got it. Didn’t realize you were comparing 2009 Garko to 2008 Marte.
I see what your saying. And while I wouldn’t totally judge a player based on a season that is a bad situation, I wouldn’t throw everything he did in that season out.
by Ryan Kelsey on Feb 27, 2009 10:10 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Okay, let’s say we don’t want to throw it out. There’s also no reason to be careless with it. When we have more information than just a grey stat line, why would we ever not use it?
Marte had 61 PA in the first 85 games, about 5 PA per week, and produced a 317 OPS.
He had 196 PA in the next 72 games, about 17 PA per week, and produced a 664 OPS.
In total, 267 PA over the whole season, with a 583 OPS.
Now, the unthoughtful thing to do is to just rail on about the 583, even though we know it’s “tainted” by unusual circumstances. That’s what the haters will do.
It is more germane, despite the somewhat smaller sample size, to look at the 664 OPS — that is the most damning number out of Marte’s season. It’s still a pitiful sample — which is why I said in late June, “it’s already too late to get a read on Marte this year” — but at least it’s under pretty normal playing conditions. For context, Ben Francisco got about 24 PA per week, from his May 6 call-up through the end of the season.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Feb 27, 2009 11:30 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree. The last 196 PAs should be given more weight. The first 61 are pretty close to worthless.
by Ryan Kelsey on Feb 27, 2009 1:03 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Do you honestly think a bench/pinch-hitter role is at all conducive to the development of a prospect?
Yes, he sucked when he got to play, but he really got the shaft.
I'm *always* in the driver's seat, cugino -- Chuck
by Turkmenbashi on Feb 26, 2009 4:19 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
no, I don’t. But as a guy without optoins, on a contending team with a 3B that the manager felt was better than him at that time, there was nothing else for him. It’s not great data, but it is something. I wouldn’t weight his 250 PAs very heavily, but I’m also not going to discount them completely.
by Ryan Kelsey on Feb 26, 2009 4:44 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Then I don’t see how you can draw that conclusion, if you’re truly doing that.
by Voltaire on Feb 26, 2009 4:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I wouldn’t weight his 250 PAs very heavily, but I’m also not going to discount them completely.
by Voltaire on Feb 26, 2009 4:49 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, I believe you can discount certain stats without throwing them out. Do you disagree? Do you think that every PA is either worth total consideration or worth nothing? I don’t. I think it is useful to way some plate appearances more than others.
I discount Marte’s 2008 slighlty for all the reasons Jay does. I just don’t discount them as much as he does. Personally, I think his 2008 numbers are more telling than what he did in 2004 in AA.
by Ryan Kelsey on Feb 26, 2009 4:58 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, I believe you can discount certain stats without throwing them out. Do you disagree? Do you think that every PA is either worth total consideration or worth nothing? I don’t
Of course not. Nothing I said implied that.
If you do consider Marte’s 2008 PA, you must discount that they came in bench-player circumstances and are virtually worthless for evaluating his everyday abilities. If you truly to that, you have almost no evidence, leaning towards “sucks.” This is why Marte probably sucks. We simply don’t have the evidence to know for sure.
by Voltaire on Feb 26, 2009 5:04 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
virtually worthless for evaluating his everyday abilities.
This is where we disagree. I think his stats from last year are not “virtually worthless”, instead, I think they are worth less than stats put up as a regular.
I think Marte sucks, by the way, for what he has done in his last 1000 PAs across 3 seasons and across AAA and MLB in a variety of roles.
by Ryan Kelsey on Feb 27, 2009 10:13 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Go up there, Andy and hit the ball. And if you don’t get a hit, you might sit for a week. And if you do get a hit, you might sit for a week.
by woodsmeister on Feb 26, 2009 4:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
If all of them manage to hang on, Columbus will have a relatively threatening lineup on paper. It sounds like Hodges does a hack job at 3B. He’s been so average at the plate, too. I prioritize Marte within this lackluster group, because he still appears to me to have the most potential by a long-shot. As everybody knows, Marte’s still the only one with an excellent defensive rep—at a skill position no less. (Ok, so Aubrey’s decent at 1B).
If there’s no where else for Marte to go, in theory he can cool out while the others get their shot. One of ’em might get an injury-induced callup. Aubrey will get hurt. Oportunities could open.
But the downside is that it invites the problem we’ve had before with Marte in denying him routine appearances: he goes cold and stays that way. I’m easily intrigued by positional flexibility, but Marte as a utility player sounds like a Godawful proposition.
Except for where you’ve ordered Marte our priorities are in line. Aubrey is 27 this year. If he doesn’t get extremely hot during in one of his narrow windows of good health. How can “get hot” though? He has very little power, and he’s limited to 1B and DH. To me it looks very grim for Aubrey—his career has to be considered on life-support right now. Jordan Brown at least can pose as a LF, and he has some potential as a platoon partner. I’m tempted to give him a reprieve based on the story of his knee injury, but he was so bad last year. He really was. So, so bad.
All four players have a lot to do in ‘09 to have any kind of a future in MLB. Brown and Aubrey especially have the farthest to go in this group, and the least amount of time to get it done. It’s sink or swim time. I promise you that, for those who sink, I won’t bring him up again.
by jhon on Feb 25, 2009 11:50 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
*Not that I’m at all confident Brown could actually play LF. He used to be described as athletic, right? Perhaps the honorary Casey Blake comp (which I previously meant playfully) is more appropriate for him.
by jhon on Feb 25, 2009 11:57 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Adam, with all due respect … do you actually know anything at all about Hodges?
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Feb 25, 2009 10:27 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yes. Hodges is a guy that isn’t broken. Hodges still has hope. Hodges isn’t riding on a reputation built on in 2005 and nothing else thereafter. Hodges will outperform Andy this year in Columbus. Hodges will have a more successful career than Andy Marte. Not that that is saying much.
Andy Marte will be 26 at the end of another failed season.
by Toxicadam on Feb 25, 2009 11:26 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yes. Hodges is a guy that isn’t broken. Hodges still has hope.
You’re making a 100% emotional argument.
There are no facts here, and no argument either.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Feb 26, 2009 12:23 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Jay, the following comment is snark-free:
Did you, in any of Marte’s 249 PA’s last year see anything that looked encouraging?
by joeee on Feb 26, 2009 1:39 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
arrrrrrrrrrrrgh read the countless threads where this has ALL BE ANSWERED MILLIONS OF TIMES BEFORE by the people you are questioning
"Less of an Indians fan" - Jay
by Voltaire on Feb 26, 2009 1:41 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Voltaire, do you care to answer my specific question? When you were watching Marte bat, was there anything you saw that made you think “damn this guy is getting unlucky/making hard contact/ has a great approach”?
by joeee on Feb 26, 2009 1:47 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
No. I also saw nothing that said “this guy has been offered a fair shake to prove that he sucks/rocks.”
"Less of an Indians fan" - Jay
by Voltaire on Feb 26, 2009 1:49 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
So was that the answer I was supposed to get in the countless threads? I’m just talking baseball here. Making observations on how a guy looks facing major league pitching. And in my opinion, he looked like a guy who could get DFA’d and them claimed by no one.
by joeee on Feb 26, 2009 1:52 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
If the past 120+ years of baseball have taught us anything, it’s that our eyes are terrible judges of baseball skill.
"Less of an Indians fan" - Jay
by Voltaire on Feb 26, 2009 2:58 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I’m sorry to be crude here, but that is such a canned response. OF COURSE, stats tell a different picture from what we see. But it’s not one versus the other. It’s both. Any FO will tell you that, I’m sure. Bill James would tell you that.
What you see matters. It just isn’t the bottom line, and there is a lot that the numbers do to fill in the gaps. Come on, are we just watching box scores these days?
by joeee on Feb 26, 2009 3:02 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Canned response to a canned claim.
"Less of an Indians fan" - Jay
by Voltaire on Feb 26, 2009 3:20 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Wow Voltaire. You burned me. I’m sorry I asked.
by joeee on Feb 26, 2009 3:23 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
He probably sucks, we don’t know for sure because he didn’t get the chance. Jay says that in about 15,000 (with evidence) in many, many threads.
"Less of an Indians fan" - Jay
by Voltaire on Feb 26, 2009 3:24 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
15,000 words that is
"Less of an Indians fan" - Jay
by Voltaire on Feb 26, 2009 3:24 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Voltaire – I really debated not responding to this comment, and I want this can of worms to die, but I was asking about what Jay saw in Marte exactly because I acknowledge that his sample size is messed up, his PA’s weren’t incredibly numerous and scattered. Exactly because I’ve read those posts, read the case for Marte with “evidence” in the form of hard data. I was asking about something the numbers don’t show.
by joeee on Feb 26, 2009 3:40 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
There isn’t anything. Except for defense. What Voltaire is wigging out and trying to say is that it’s not that the sample size just limits the data, it’s also that it affects his performance.
You’re right, he never looked good, but the larger point is that he might be a guy who’s never going to look good in a few ABs a week; that’s a skill set different from simply “hitting the ball.”
So, the hope that exists is that if he actually gets back to playing every day, which hasn’t happened in a long time now, maybe he’ll get his eye back etc.
by afh4 on Feb 26, 2009 8:58 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
This view of baseball depresses me.
I’m guessing that somewhere between BABIP, park adjustment factor, et cetera, there lies something that the numbers can’t quite peg. But this is just an emotional guess.
Why would scouts or anyone in the FO ever need to watch a hitting prospect? Why not just glance at his stat line?
by joeee on Feb 26, 2009 12:20 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I think you’re missing his point.
Travis Hafner is overrated. Clarity is underrated. David Dellucci is David Dellucci.
by westbrook on Feb 26, 2009 12:28 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I asked about something the numbers don’t show, and afh4 said that there is nothing they don’t show aside from defense.
by joeee on Feb 26, 2009 12:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I thought
There isn’t anything.
was a reply to
I was asking about what Jay saw in Marte exactly
Travis Hafner is overrated. Clarity is underrated. David Dellucci is David Dellucci.
by westbrook on Feb 26, 2009 12:33 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
This is correct. There was nothing to see in watching Marte last year that was much of a cause for optimism.
I mean, really. You think I meant that there was nothing to see in baseball that wasn’t in the numbers? Really?
by afh4 on Feb 26, 2009 9:08 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I don’t see what the one has to do with the other.
The natural state of a baseball player is that he’s playing almost every day. When scouts check out teenagers in the Dominican, high school and college players in the U.S., minor leaguers or major leaguers for potential trades … virtually all of those players are seeing live pitching in game situations 5-7 times a week.
So when you see a player who is hardly ever facing live pitching, it’s not an apples-to-apples comparison. IF it is affecting his hitting to be so bereft of reps, then it will affect both what the scout sees and also the numbers.
The scouting report is totally valid, as it always is, but as always, it must be seen in context. He looked like X, and he’s been seeing live pitching once a week. Therefore, we assume he’s X when he’s seeing live pitching once a week. Even that is an extrapolation, and anything beyond that is a further extrapolation.
All data is useless when viewed out of context.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Feb 26, 2009 12:32 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
this.
Travis Hafner is overrated. Clarity is underrated. David Dellucci is David Dellucci.
by westbrook on Feb 26, 2009 12:34 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
We need to stop saying “this” to what we cannot say for ourselves. I find it dismissive, not supportive, of the original contribution.
by jhon on Feb 26, 2009 12:45 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
This.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Feb 26, 2009 12:45 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Because of the truth of Jhon’s statement, and Jay’s succinct follow up, there is some sort of blackhole created now, yes?
by joeee on Feb 26, 2009 12:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
This too.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Feb 26, 2009 12:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
And the blackhole closes back up, lgt is saved.
by joeee on Feb 26, 2009 12:51 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
These.
Travis Hafner is overrated. Clarity is underrated. David Dellucci is David Dellucci.
by westbrook on Feb 26, 2009 1:13 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Right, but I feel that the general point still stands. Watching players has different value from statistics, and they are useful – not necessarily in equal weight – in player evaluation. But you seem to agree with me here.
by joeee on Feb 26, 2009 12:42 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Asked and answered, many times.
First, yes, I sometimes saw things that looked like a good hitter, and in particular like a guy with a lot more power than his numbers show.
Second, I’m not a scout anyway.
Third, even if he looked terrible all the time, that would be just as much a product of his not getting regular playing time as the bad numbers would be.
So it’s not really relevant, for me or for anyone else, and yes, joeee, I’ve said all this many times before. What I see in Marte is a guy who has 4-5 seasons under his belt, each of which were more impressive than any one season ever put up by the likes of Hodges, Brown or Aubrey. That is truly damning with faint praise, however.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Feb 26, 2009 8:58 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
First, yes, I sometimes saw things that looked like a good hitter, and in particular like a guy with a lot more power than his numbers show.
Such as?
by joeee on Feb 26, 2009 10:00 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
And of course your not a scout. I’m pretty sure baseball is no ones day job here. Who cares? Are you a statistician?
by joeee on Feb 26, 2009 10:00 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Joeee, I don’t know how to get this through to you.
1. I tend not to share my scouting observations simply because I don’t take them very seriously. Mine or almost anyone else’s here.
2. It wouldn’t matter anyway, see third point above.
Obviously you want for it to be about this. I don’t think it’s about this.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Feb 26, 2009 10:34 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I understand point number 2. But granted that other peoples’ scouting observations count for very little, I think that what you see is an important part of the game. Maybe just from a purely enjoyable frame of reference, but one nonetheless. When talking Tribe, I feel like it’s fair game to talk about what you see, but I can understand if you don’t want to.
Its dumb talking about Marte as much as I do, but there is a lot against him, as you well already know. His 250 PA’s this year were awful. His 06 and 07 years in AAA trended downward, with good SS. He didn’t lay off breaking pitches in 250 PAs against MLB pitching – maybe that’s a breaking in thing, but maybe strike-zone awareness is instinctual. Also, the FO, who is universally regarded as extremely skilled, had no qualms with him getting scattered playing time. As if Shapiro knew he were sitting on the next David Wright but just didn’t want to hurt Wedge’s feelings.
by joeee on Feb 26, 2009 12:10 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I never made any point of trying to study what Marte was doing. Sometimes he looked really good, sometimes he didn’t. I would go into more detail if I thought I could remember it all that well, and if I thought it would add anything.
I won’t question the downward trend, but I think it’s significance is not clear-cut.
The last point is the least valid. Front office decisions are based on multiple options; they rarely are singular judgments on single players. Marte didn’t have to be the next David Wright to warrant more playing time, but it’s fair to assume that the organization as a whole did not put a priority on giving Marte regular playing time.
That being the case, the argument comes down to “some” playing time versus “virtually none,” and at that point, arguably Shapiro would be out of line dictating usage to Wedge in such minute detail. (Billy Beane reportedly would, but he’s the only GM operating that way to my knowledge.) Bottom line, the argument for giving Marte an extended look has nothing to do with his being the next David Wright.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Feb 26, 2009 12:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Well said
I'm *always* in the driver's seat, cugino -- Chuck
by Turkmenbashi on Feb 26, 2009 9:41 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
The stats also tell us that Marte sucks.
Don't be stupid. PUT IN MELOAN.
by gte619n on Feb 26, 2009 8:56 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
The stats also tell us that Marte sucks when not given any real chance to succeed.
Fixed.
by fwembt on Feb 26, 2009 11:07 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Also, I just glanced at Marte’s splits from last year:
827 OPS versus lefties
499 OPS versus righties.
Goddawful. And the fact that he was fine against lefties makes me feel like it wasn’t a rhythm thing.
by joeee on Feb 26, 2009 1:45 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Thank you for sharing your feelings regarding those 67 PA. Well done.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Feb 26, 2009 8:53 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
.364 BABIP against lefties, .243 against righties. If we can straighten that out, we might have Jose Hernandez on our hands!
by afh4 on Feb 26, 2009 9:00 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, good point. But PA # merely weakens the observation, sometimes significantly, more than it renders it useless. That’s probably the name of the game with Marte.
by joeee on Feb 26, 2009 10:02 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
No, it actually gets pretty close to “useless” at that point — 200-400 PA, that’s a weak observation. We can play the speculation game all day. Maybe he was very lucky in those 67 PA and given equal luck would have had more normal splits, horrible on both sides. Maybe he needs time to settle in only against righties but is always comfortable against lefties — that is a very reasonable proposition for a righty hitter, by the way, because the key factor in that split is the ability to pick the ball up out of the pitcher’s hand. Maybe none of it means anything. It’s just masturbation at the 67 PA level.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Feb 26, 2009 10:31 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I can’t believe how overstated this comment is. You’re serious?
by supermarioelia on Feb 26, 2009 1:05 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
He thinks he’s serious. It’ll pass.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Feb 26, 2009 1:06 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
That’s a purely emotional argument Jay. How you have fallen!
by joeee on Feb 26, 2009 1:23 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
No, it’s actually purely analytical, but I’m too nice to give you the details.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Feb 26, 2009 1:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
You’re the only person arguing Jay. I’m just making a prediction based on previous results.
Only time will tell now. The past is the past. As more data comes in, we can see how you will spin that. I’m sure they will somehow “mishandle” Marte in AAA, too. He will not get enough AB’s on sunny days, he will not play 10 games in a row for a stretch, learning a new position has distracted him, etc etc.
There’s a reason why awful players have small sample sizes.
by Toxicadam on Feb 26, 2009 9:05 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Previous results are that Hodges has never hit as well as Marte, at any age, or at any level, or in the absolute sense, and he’s basically the same age. He’s also a substantially worse defender, at a rate of -7 runs per 150 games. PECOTA in fact now projects Hodges to be a slightly better hitter, but a worse player overall because of his defense.
I’ve seen this before. Sometimes fans will prefer a minor leaguer to a major leaguer, simply because they don’t really know anything about the minor leaguer and they are sick-to-death of the major leaguer. You obviously have fallen into that trap, because your statements about this don’t make any actual sense, based on the actual facts. You apparently think that I’m rationalizing, but at least I am aware of the facts.
As I said to you in the previous thread … we can all have our opinions, but we’re going to stick to the facts here. You can save the cleveland.com schtick for cleveland.com.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Feb 26, 2009 9:18 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Chances are high that neither Hodges nor Marte are the 3B of the Future. I’d guess, however, that Marte has a significantly higher probability of being the 3B of somebody’s future.
by FredOx on Feb 26, 2009 9:23 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
It’s all more comfortable if you just put Jhonny in that bin.
Though I look right at home, I still feel like an exile
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Feb 26, 2009 11:18 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
But even Jhonny, by that point, is a stopgap.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Feb 26, 2009 11:18 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
It’s good to now that PECOTA projections pass off as facts now.
by Toxicadam on Feb 26, 2009 9:53 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
That is a tired and weak comeback.
What is a fact is that PECOTA is objective about evaluating the data. Perfectly accurate, no, but objective, yes.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Feb 26, 2009 10:32 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Here’s the thing. Hodges has never hit as well as the Marte of 2005. THere is no question that 2005 Marte > 2008 Hodges. But with any guy that just finished AA, there is a huge range of possibilities. Marte has had a really really good season at AAA, two crappy seasons at AAA and a season as a backup, which he was incredibly bad at, in Cleveland. We don’t have those extra seasons of data for Hodges.
I think stuff that happened 3 seasons and 1000 ABs ago in a player’s development is pretty useless. I know Marte is still not old. But at some point, we have to realize that, at 25, he is closer to what he was at 22, 23, and 24 than what he was at 20 and 21.
by Ryan Kelsey on Feb 26, 2009 10:48 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Hodges has never hit as well as Marte in 2006 or 2007 either. Even in Marte’s worst seasons — the ones that supposedly sank him as a prospect — he was younger than Hodges is now, and a better hitter than Hodges has ever been, and a better defender.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Feb 26, 2009 11:01 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Just marry Marte already for crying outside!
Signature to be named later.
by emd2k3 on Feb 26, 2009 11:04 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I am married … to reality.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Feb 26, 2009 11:04 AM EST up reply actions 2 recs
Then, he could play 3rd base in your dreams.
Signature to be named later.
by emd2k3 on Feb 26, 2009 12:15 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I honestly don’t even want him to play 3B anymore. I’m excited to have DeRosa playing 3B in 2009, and I hope we have a good option for 3B in 2010. Right now, that’s totally up in the air.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Feb 26, 2009 12:37 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
if DeRo wins a WS then takes the $$ from his soaring reputation, I wouldn’t mind having some 3B partays in 2010.
If he refinds his stroke in AAA.
Travis Hafner is overrated. Clarity is underrated. David Dellucci is David Dellucci.
by westbrook on Feb 26, 2009 12:40 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I was just kiddin’ around.
Signature to be named later.
by emd2k3 on Feb 26, 2009 1:52 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I just don’t forgive his terrible OBP of 07 and his MLB ABs as much as you do.
by Ryan Kelsey on Feb 26, 2009 11:31 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
It’s the Kelly Holcomb Conundrum here. Wes Hodges is in the minors and occasionally does well. The guy we saw once a week last year didn’t seem to be very good. Ergo, the backup/minor leaguer is far better and once those idiots who do this for a living realize it, we will all be better off. It’s purely emotionally based, no real fact behind it at all.
by fwembt on Feb 26, 2009 11:10 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
It should be noted that I don’t see much of a future in Cleveland for Marte either. But Wes Hodges? Come on.
by fwembt on Feb 26, 2009 11:12 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I will be shocked if Marte is ever on our big-league roster again. Obviously DeRosa would have to be injured, but how many others as well?
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Feb 26, 2009 11:14 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Actually, what would not shock me is if the Indians just treat him as a disposable minor league signing. That is, if DeRosa goes down for a few weeks, they bring Marte up for a few weeks and then put him on waivers again when DeRosa comes back, not particularly worried if they lose him.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Feb 26, 2009 11:16 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
is this the logistical state of play now? any time marte is called up (who knows if that ever happens), then sending him back down will trigger another DFA/waiver process?
i just don’t know if i can handle the stress…
by DontCallMeJoey on Feb 26, 2009 6:25 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, except that the next time he clears waivers, he can refuse the outright assignment and become a free agent instead.
Every player can be outrighted from the 40-man roster to a minor league contract one time in his career, but other than the first time, it’s his choice whether to accept an outright assignment. If he accepts it, it’s usually because his contract with his current team is paying better than he’s likely to get elsewhere, e.g., Ramon Vazquez a few years ago, fumed like crazy when we outrighted him, but he showed up at Buffalo anyway.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Feb 26, 2009 6:37 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I don’t know if I agree with this. In Wedge’s grit based mind, I could see him now favoring Marte because he has somehow paid his dues by clearing waivers and officially becoming a journeyman/minor leaguer. Marte could be the next Casey Blake. I could totally see Wedge picking him for his “experience” over another young ball player. All of this has always been about getting Marte a little bit more gritty.
by randallhank on Feb 27, 2009 1:22 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
someone get Marte a Wichita State hat, and he’ll be manning the hot corner in no time…
by DontCallMeJoey on Feb 27, 2009 2:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
My first experience with this phenomenon ironically involved Casey Blake. In 2005, during the Killer B’s period, a lot of people started clamoring for Franklin Gutierrez, who had arrived amid much hype in the Bradley trade a few months earlier. Of course, Gootz was hitting as bad or worse than Blake, even though he was in Double-A and not the majors — but once certain fans get sick of a guy, reason just doesn’t matter anymore.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Feb 26, 2009 11:14 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Certain fans? Everybody wants heads to roll when performance is down. Wedge was voted Manager of the Year in ‘07, and in ’08 people were writing about how incompetent he was and that his head should roll. By the end of the season, Wedge had guided a completely battered life boat to .500. That’s something.
by joeee on Feb 26, 2009 12:29 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
The fans never voted Wedge manager of the year.
Yes, certain fans.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Feb 26, 2009 12:33 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
But did Wedge batter the lifeboat?
Think about it.
Signature to be named later.
by emd2k3 on Feb 26, 2009 1:53 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
This’ll be my last comment before I bow out -
I absolutely do not believe that Wedge hurt the Tribe last year, aside from his mismanagement of Marte, which is possibly only minimally damaging anyway. What battered our lifeboat was losing our Cy Young pitcher, regardless of its many benefits that can pay dividends as soon as this year, losing our second Cy Young pitcher to injuy, having a bullpen that was historically dysfunctional and, from what I can tell, not misused by Wedge, losing Hafner and Victor to injuries, missing a half-season of Asdrubal to sophomore slump and Garko to basic regression. But of course, this too has been written ad infinitum here.
by joeee on Feb 26, 2009 2:13 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Final clarification for final remark:
second Cy Young pitcher = Cy Young caliber = fancy way of saying Fausto. Also! Westbrook’s Tommy Johns’. I shudder at how devastating a healthy and effective Sabathia, Fausto, Lee, Westbrook rotation is. Just filthy.
by joeee on Feb 26, 2009 2:37 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with your post. That said, no one here has argued otherwise. No one thinks the mishandling of Marte caused us to lose last year. We just think Marte has been misused.
by Roger Dorn on Feb 26, 2009 2:40 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I think we could have been 1-2 wins better with Marte out there, taking playing time away from Michaels/Tyner/Aubrey and occasionally/eventually Gutierrez/Garko, providing slightly worse offense than those guys along with a two-position defensive upgrade (with Blake in LF/RF). It turned out that it didn’t matter, but it could have mattered. I could say the same for letting Shoppach ride the pine for an extra two weeks before putting Victor on the DL. I wish I could say the same for Hafner and the DL, but nobody else was hitting worth a damn anyway.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Feb 26, 2009 3:37 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
This is a good point, something you have mentioned in a lot of your posts, but is often ignored by the debaters. Marte’s defense grades out as strong, the defensive upgrade would have been at two positions not just one. This is not something to just dismiss because of his struggles at the plate
by Roger Dorn on Feb 26, 2009 3:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
It is something to dismiss if (a) you assume that he will have a 500-ish OPS no matter how much he plays, and (b) if all those other players aren’t hitting terribly. While (a) is in dispute, (b) certainly was not.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Feb 26, 2009 3:49 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
on the Hafner point…i was trying to think through the contingency plan at DH if Pronk continues to chug in ’09. do we make some crazy mish-mash of vic, shoppach, garko and (gulp) dellucci try to work? or should we expect to see an early call up for laporta?
separately, what are the chances of my getting an unimpeded run at a drop kick to dellucci’s chest before the season starts?
by DontCallMeJoey on Feb 26, 2009 7:38 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Hafner obviously will get a long, long time to try to turn things around, but if he has a prolonged struggle, that will put more strain on Garko and Dellucci to either hit or get booted off the roster — they won’t get as much latitude as Hafner. What I’m saying is, if Hafner struggles, he won’t be removed, but they may want someone else to take his AB.
And after all, Shoppach can’t catch every game.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Feb 26, 2009 8:01 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Nice. The backup quarterback is always the most popular guy on the team.
by woodsmeister on Feb 26, 2009 11:18 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Kelly Holcomb was great . . . for one playoff game against Pittsburgh. He had, what, the third or fourth most passing yards in playoff history. Of course, the Browns blew a big lead because Dennis Northcutt dropped a pass when he was wide open that would have given the Browns a first down so they could run out the clock. And Pittsburgh came back to win the game on the next drive.
I was watching that game with a friend who’s a big Steelers fans — that was one of the worst days of my life. I thought we were actually going to win that game and finally beat the Steelers. I should have known better.
by Buckeye Brad on Feb 26, 2009 11:34 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Those idiots who do this for a living have stated that Hodges is starting at 3b over Marte.
by joeee on Feb 26, 2009 12:17 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Again, asked and answered.
Hodges needs to play 3B every day to develop at 3B. Marte needs to see live pitching every day and doesn’t need any development at 3B, and in fact his career is well served by getting him some experience at 1B.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Feb 26, 2009 12:34 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
What use is he at 1b if one of his main sticking points is his excellent glove at a difficult defensive position?
by joeee on Feb 26, 2009 12:36 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Simple versatility. He could well end up a 3B-1B bench guy, and even if you think Marte is better defensively over the long haul, you’d rather leave your solid 3B at 3B in a late-game situation.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Feb 26, 2009 12:38 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I’m sure it’s been said here before but I think the brass is pretty sure Marte will not be a stud a a hitter. So they are going to do their best to try to develop him as a utility guy while not compromising other organizational priorities.
by randallhank on Feb 27, 2009 1:29 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
But there’s a wide space in between “stud hitter” and “utility guy.” We’ve just been hoping he could be “decent hitter with a good glove.” I really don’t see his being used at 1B and DH as meaning that he won’t end up back at 3B full time, but I don’t see him ever playing for Wedge in any role, unless he somehow totally blows up in Columbus.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Feb 27, 2009 4:29 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Because winning games isn’t the point of AAA?
by afh4 on Feb 26, 2009 9:11 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Sweet, this means the Annual is a little less untimely with regard to Andy.
by tabler84 on Feb 25, 2009 8:48 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
heh, rec
"Less of an Indians fan" - Jay
by Voltaire on Feb 25, 2009 10:16 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Page 44 survives.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Feb 25, 2009 10:28 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
BTW, if you read this, Emily said she will settle for nothing less than an autographed copy. She wants it signed by you and Dick. We figured out that Maple Street Press is actually a subsidiary of the DLE.
by randallhank on Feb 27, 2009 1:31 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I wish I could get a few copies autographed by everyone, but I think Satullo and I are the only two who even live in the same city. The authors are located in: Philadelphia, Cleveland, Canton, Boston, Chicago, Rochester NY, Kansas CIty, somewhere in Florida, Columbus … come to think of it, I have no idea where fleerdon is. Dude, where are you?
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Feb 27, 2009 4:32 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Fleerdon is in Toledo according to the blurb at the end of his article
by Roger Dorn on Feb 27, 2009 7:06 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Hope is the thing with feathers.
—E. Dickinson
by woodsmeister on Feb 26, 2009 9:52 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
woah, what did i drink tonight?> airplane? does anyone else see that?
I refuse to ever root for a team that routinely does the MVP chant for opposing players.
by TheVanillaGorilla on Feb 26, 2009 1:18 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
in fairness, this is nothing you can’t do with MS Paint. or a printer, posterboard and markers.
Travis Hafner is overrated. Clarity is underrated. David Dellucci is David Dellucci.
by westbrook on Feb 26, 2009 2:33 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Well, I did it with PhotoShop – it tells you where my skills are.
by Ryan on Feb 26, 2009 9:58 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
That’s amazingly bad. Kudos!
Signature to be named later.
by emd2k3 on Feb 26, 2009 12:15 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
someone needs to discover anti-aliasing.
Travis Hafner is overrated. Clarity is underrated. David Dellucci is David Dellucci.
by westbrook on Feb 26, 2009 12:43 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
The options thing. The value of a guy who’s out of options and unproven is just not that great.
In fact, his trade value just went up considerably, now that he made it through waivers and can be kept in the minors.
In fact, don’t be surprised if either Marte is traded … or Aubrey is released.
Well, that’s just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Feb 25, 2009 1:35 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
by Brick. on Feb 26, 2009 10:50 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
I like to see Marte as the everyday DH for a while in Columbus.
-Erik
by drerikbrady on Feb 26, 2009 12:06 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
The issue is that it’s already a crowded picture down there, with Brown/Aubrey at 1B and Gimenez/Toregas at catcher. Unless one of those guys is sent to Akron, you’ve got at least six guys sharing at most four positions.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Feb 26, 2009 12:12 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, I know it can’t happen. But what I don’t want to see is them try to stick him at another position and then have him struggle to hit. Then we have yet another variable… is he not hitting because he’s trying to adjust to playing 1B? Anyway, I’d just like to be able to gather enough data to say anything about him.
Aubrey going to wind up hurt anyway, so it’s more like 5 guys sharing 4 positions.
-Erik
by drerikbrady on Feb 26, 2009 5:08 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Listen, if Marte can’t hit while learning 1B or DH, even I’m going to throw the book at him. It’s unreasonable to expect a still-developing hitter to hit when he sits for a week at a time, but it’s not unreasonable to ask him to learn 1B. It’s not like he’s learning to play catcher!
My sense is that he needs to get back to basics and rebuild his approach and his swing at this point. It makes no difference if a big part of the reason he’s out of whack is that he hasn’t had consistent playing time. He has to get serious about being a fundamentally good hitter again. He may not even realize what the things were that he was doing well when he was younger, but if he doesn’t figure it out, he’s definitely done.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Feb 26, 2009 6:40 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
That’s a good point about Aubrey getting hurt.
I think it’s very possible that one of those guys gets stashed in Akron, maybe Toregas.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Feb 26, 2009 6:42 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Exactly. I’ll believe the AB crunch when I see it. Barring injury, at least one of these guys can be at Akron, with no real loss. ABs for everyone! I for one, am pleased that Andy is back.
by dgcambridge on Feb 27, 2009 6:21 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Hell, at this point, I’m not sure I’d care if it was Marte who went to Akron. I’m not saying he deserves it, but the guy needs to go and just beat up on some pitching somewhere, even if just to get his confidence back.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Feb 27, 2009 6:45 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Who’s the slated 3B for Akron with Hodges moving up? Man that’d be sweet to see Andy actually start to hit the ball again.
by supermarioelia on Feb 27, 2009 7:00 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Ugh — as if he deserves a promotion. Fortunately, he’s really just keeping it warm for The Chizl.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Feb 27, 2009 8:01 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
rec for someone other than me using The Chizl. Flag for encouraging the move of The Chizl off of SS (and I know the organization has already stated their desire to do this).
by APV on Feb 27, 2009 8:33 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I have to give the org the benefit of the doubt on this, because they generally way in the other direction. That tells me that they have some real reasons to move him. It may also be that they don’t see the point in having him compete direclty with RIvero, who is only five months older, when they already expect Asdrubal to block those guys as it is.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Feb 27, 2009 9:31 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I’m ok with the transition to 3B if it is coupled with a more aggressive placement of him this season (i.e. starting at Kinston).
by APV on Feb 27, 2009 11:54 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I’d be pretty surprised if he started below Kinston this year.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Feb 28, 2009 1:56 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Just think, without Mr. Marte, LGT would be much more boring.
Signature to be named later.
by emd2k3 on Feb 26, 2009 12:14 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
I’ll be fine when he’s gone. Really, I’m ready.
by jhon on Feb 26, 2009 12:21 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Andy Marte
I saw Marte play at Buffalo in 06 and it was evident that the guy is a stiff… his concentration level is that of someone waiting in line for a stadium hotdog…im not a scout or a self proclaimed expert of baseball talent but this guy needs to be sent packing, yes Boston did it to us again…anyone remember the infamous Ted Cox ?? We did get a decent backstop in Shoppach , but the star 3rd baseman is a mirage… best prospect at 3rd base ?? say it ain’t so man.
by Vernie on Feb 26, 2009 2:04 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
This is exactly what this thread needed right now.
I don’t know why nobody ever thought to compare him to Ted Cox before. Brilliant.
Welcome to the site, Vernie. Hope you’re wearing a helmet.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Feb 26, 2009 2:22 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
You resisted from chiding him on the subject line?
Travis Hafner is overrated. Clarity is underrated. David Dellucci is David Dellucci.
by westbrook on Feb 26, 2009 2:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I’m not sure you were being facetious, but I do think this is what we needed. We can all band together and yell at our new friend, Vernie.
by Ryan Kelsey on Feb 26, 2009 2:54 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Rec. Actually I want to rec Vernie’s message because I found the Ted Cox part so funny in a “there you go again with the Rocky Marciano” sort of way. But I just don’t want to inadvertently promote that type of thing. Or do I?
by randallhank on Feb 27, 2009 1:35 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
hey man where’s the avatar, this ain’t no nudist colony.
by hans on Feb 27, 2009 2:19 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Please give evidence of times that Boston “has done it to us.” I am not talking about beating us in regular or postseason games, I am talking about outwitting our front office
Also, please state your opinion as to whether or not Kelly Shoppach has been more valuable than Coco Crisp since the trade went down
by Roger Dorn on Feb 26, 2009 2:42 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Let’s Go Tribe! Commented Andy Marte on Castrovince: Marte Clears Waivers on Let’s Go Tribe! – 02/26/09 2:04 PM EST (2 replies)
Let’s Go Tribe! Joined Let’s Go Tribe! – 02/26/09 1:54 PM EST
This is always my favorite part.
by NickFantana on Feb 26, 2009 3:06 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
did you guys just gloss over the fact that vern has actually seen marte play? as recently as 2006. furthermore, he has evidence of sifferyness.
by Brick. on Feb 26, 2009 3:15 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Oh, it’s better than that. Take a look at Marte’s odd 2006 splits … here … either Vernie saw Marte in the middle of his torrid seven-week hot streak (988 OPS), or Marte went on that hot streak right after Vernie saw him. Either way, this illustrates powerfully the value of the civilian scouting report. And having nothing to do with Vernie, it also illustrates the value of judging a player on his last 143 PA.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Feb 26, 2009 3:42 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
im not a scout or a self proclaimed expert of baseball talent but this guy needs to be sent packing
And yet, here you are, making pronouncements like you are one. I’m going to go ahead and guess you aren’t an English teacher either.
by fwembt on Feb 26, 2009 4:28 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I’m actually wondering if the Tribe brass are surprised they still have Marte, and if they’re going to give him significant playing time anywhere, or try to trade him again, now that he doesn’t have to be on a major league roster.
I just don’t think Andy ranks very high on the psycho-grit-gamer-teamplayer matrix they keep. As opposed to Barfield who gets his job taken away from him yet still does all the right things, I don’t know how interested they are in giving him a decent shot at any level.
It’s not like there’s a lot of free AB’s in Columbus. I really hope they trade him, and I’m sure he does too.
by mcrose on Feb 26, 2009 4:08 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Again – how do we know that Barfield is doing “all the right things” and Marte has not been? And don’t tell me it’s because he allegedly reported to camp out of shape LAST year. Even allegedly out of shape Marte put up reasonably decent spring training numbers last year. Andy may not be a gritty guy. It seems that he seriously sweats the small stuff and it appears from interviews that last year he treated every at bat with the pressure that it might be his last. Barfield, on the other hand, went to Buffalo last year and stunk up the place.
by woodsmeister on Feb 26, 2009 4:15 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
As opposed to Barfield who gets his job taken away from him yet still does all the right things
he gave his job away.
what right things?
by Brick. on Feb 26, 2009 4:33 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
All the things that are assigned value on a chart somewhere that are unrelated to performance. As you pointed out, he gave his job away and they still offered him another.
by mcrose on Feb 26, 2009 4:35 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
That’s sort of like asking me to prove that Wedge has “his kind of player” that he prefers to have on his squad. I know that its true, and I know what kind of player it is (not player, really, but personality let’s say) but I don’t have a secretly obtained recording where he admits it and gives examples.
I’ve watched Marte enuf to know that simply as a personality and temperament, he is an outlier on their internal profile chart. If his performance was better, it wouldn’t matter, but since he hasn’t been performing well, it does.
And that is the whole deal – if he performed better when they did give him a shot, it wouldn’t matter. Now, the only way he will have any further opportunity is if he clearly forces his way back up the ladder with success in less than ideal circumstances. Unlike Barfield.
by mcrose on Feb 26, 2009 4:32 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
I was just trying to make the point that your argument was speculative, unprovable and non-empirical. The fact that you recognized that is sufficient.
by woodsmeister on Feb 26, 2009 4:45 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
Featured Stories
Sweet Baboo
Certain photos copyright © 2010 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.
