Another reason to fret
by odradek on Mar 28, 2009 12:21 AM EDT
95 comments
I try not to pay attention to spring training, but this spring has gone on forever.
I looked today at spring stats (numbers before Friday's game) because I've been worried about the offense. With the prominent exceptions of Sizemore and Peralta, there doesn't seem to be a lot of hitting. Anytime I watch, I see weak grounders, pop-ups and off-balance swings. Who's squaring up on the ball?
The Indians have scored 135 runs this spring, which is good for 20th most in the majors. They are 23rd in on-base percentage, and 17th in both total bases and slugging percentage. The team is also 22nd in the majors in doubles, which is one of my favorite indicators of offensive prowess. These mediocre numbers come in what appears to be a hitter's park (let us hope so for the sake of Indians pitching, which has allowed more runs than all but seven other teams). I don't recall there being one of those 16-4 romps we remember from alligator land.
It wasn't long ago the Indians could really knock the ball around. The team scored 870 runs in 2006. The Tribe could go on a tear and score six or seven runs without breaking a sweat. I know offenses have lessened in the past few years (thanks to the humidor, etc.), but the Indians have had what could be generously described as an unreliable offense over the past two seasons: in 2007 the team scored 811 runs (still quite good) and 805 in 2008 (good for sixth or seventh in the bigs as I remember). But I can't forget that stretch in late April when the starting pitching was truly incredible—when Laffey, Lee and Jake were in the top ten in ERA—and the team couldn't score four runs if it had five outs an inning.
So what can be expected this season? Another awesome season from Sizemore; perhaps a breakout season from Peralta. Regression from Shoppach, Choo, Carroll and DeRosa. More of the same from Garko, Barfield, Dellucci and Hafner (this is not a good thing). Some improvement from Victor and Francisco.
Can this team score 800 runs? I fear not. The offense has underperformed for the past two seasons, but maybe what we see is what we get. And the starting pitching won't be as good as it was in 2008, so the offense needs to show some vitality.
I'm not exactly encouraged by what I'm seeing in Goodyear.
0 recs |
95 comments
Email
Print
Comments
It’s funny – I’m not that worried about the offense (though there’s room for improvement). It’s the rotation that really scares me.
by Ryan on Mar 28, 2009 12:29 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
And it’s funny that the bullpen, which hasn’t been really good as a unit since 2005, is the one thing that neither of you mention
by APV on Mar 28, 2009 12:34 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hey, my irrational fears can only concentrate on one thing at a time.
by Ryan on Mar 28, 2009 12:40 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think the pen looks better than it has since 2005. No more fliers like Danny Graves or Keith Foulke or Oldberto. I think Betancourt might be finished, but adding Wood and Smith makes a whole lot of difference.
by odradek on Mar 28, 2009 1:09 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You wanna talk about a scare? I was skimming the minor league spring stats and saw a Jose Jimenez had pitched two innings. IMAGINE MY SHOCK. Then I remembered there’s a different Jose Jimenez in the Indians system. What a bizarre and fun turn of events! But boy, I almost shook a fist over that one. I’m going to play paper football now. Goodbye.
by JRontherim on Mar 28, 2009 1:05 AM EDT reply actions 1 recs
Dude should change his name. Or become Jose Jimenez II.
by odradek on Mar 28, 2009 1:11 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
JImenez Jimenez … then, at least he could try to win that minor league name bracket.
'Z' button abuser.
by emd2k3 on Mar 28, 2009 9:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Choo and DeRosa played very little this spring….Those numbers are missing
by volapuk on Mar 28, 2009 2:16 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
This is important.
Though I look right at home, I still feel like an exile
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Mar 28, 2009 8:58 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Shoppach and Vic have seldom both been in the lineup this spring, also. I think we’ll see a lot more of that combination during the season.
by APV on Mar 28, 2009 11:25 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
http://www.royalsreview.com/2009/2/26/772552/spring-training-stats-are
Ben Francisco's only fan on LGT
by Toxicadam on Mar 28, 2009 3:05 AM EDT reply actions 1 recs
Last year’s AL MVP hit .159 with a 450 OPS in Spring Training.
Ben Francisco's only fan on LGT
by Toxicadam on Mar 28, 2009 3:10 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Some of this is whistling-past-the-graveyard stuff. Pay no attention to these numbers: they don’t matter. Except when they do (e.g., John Dewan and the predictive value of spring slugging percentages). And this from Royals Review:
This isn’t to say that spring training performance is necessarily irrelevant. Players’ skills and tools can change from year to year, particularly with the improvement of younger players and the deterioration of older players. Managers, coaches and front office personnel spend several weeks with these players, monitoring and evaluating them. They will see (or at least attempt to determine) if a pitcher has added velocity, added or improved a pitch or changed his mechanics to improve his control. They will see if a hitter’s pitch recognition has improved, if he’s hitting the ball with more power or if an older player has lost a step. But these evaluations cannot made in a meaningful and reliable way by use of spring training statistics for the above reasons. Close observation and tools-based evaluation on a daily basis is necessary to see if a player’s tools have improved or declined. Certainly those observations can have important consequences to a variety of player personnel decisions.
Clearly spring training is not purely irrelevant or meaningless. There’s a lot of noise, but also some meaning.
by odradek on Mar 28, 2009 2:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
PECOTA makes basically the assumptions as you do — although not a Peralta breakout — and comes up with 817 runs, good for 3rd in the AL and not far behind the Red Sox (841) and Orioles (825).
Your impressions aren’t wrong (other than overreacting to some bad spring swings), but it may be that your impression of the quality of competition is badly off. The league simply doesn’t have towering offenses anymore. The big DHs and first basemen have receded significantly, and defense has become a priority for the smartest teams, nearly all of which are in the AL, in addition to the best scouting clubs like the Twins and Angels.
The new defensive emphasis may be the reason why AL numbers started to look lower than NL numbers last season — maybe that’s not a fluke, maybe it’s the new status quo. I actually hope that is the case, because it will make for a games to watch.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Mar 28, 2009 9:43 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
From a fanpost I put up a while back…
I give you the mean run differentials of the Junior Circuit teams which made the playoffs in the last three seasons.
2007: 867 RS – 717 RA
2006: 831 RS – 713 RA
2005: 825 RS – 721 RA
I can now add to that 2008: RS – 799 RA – 698. Obviously there are more scientific ways to do this, but I think it has some value just as a ballpark concept of what a modern AL playoff team is. I actually agree with odarek, as I commented on Paul’s site a couple of weeks ago: i don’t regard the second-half offense as the “real” Indians offense, in the sense that I don’t think it’s a true barometer for 2009. It’s a handful of data points, same as the first half. It’s 60 games. I don’t think it’s a point in this team’s favor that they came together only after the F.O. threw up its hands. But I also agree with Jay (I think?) in that 770-ish runs may be plenty in the Central if we can stitch together a pitching staff.
by fleerdon on Mar 28, 2009 10:59 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don’t think it’s a point in this team’s favor that they came together only after the F.O. threw up its hands.
But this is a distortion. Our biggest improvements came at the C, RF and 2B positions. At catcher, a healthy Shoppach replaced an injured Victor. In RF, an increasingly healthy Choo replaced a combination of mediocre and bad players. At second, a very young Asdrubal let his game fall apart in the first half but eventually put it back together. None of these situations had anything to do with our competitive environment.
Sizemore and Peralta were both strong in the first half, and (as I’ve noted many times) Garko’s struggles continued significantly into the second half. Did we have an all-around offensive freeze in the first couple of months? Yes, clearly we did. But that’s not the same thing as saying that the “team came together” after the season was lost. That’s ascribing a psychological condition to a team whose basic composition had changed, and it falls apart under any scrutiny.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Mar 28, 2009 11:25 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
True enough. The season was pretty well over in June, too, and the non-Casey Blake offense still kind of sucked in June. But I’m taking the under on Tango right now, and whether that’s a reasoned opinion or just surreptitious pessimism, I’m not quite sure.
I think the idea I’ve found most persuasive is that 60-game thing. Yes, it was a great offense — for 60 games. I want to believe that’s more representative of the 2009 offense than the rest of the 2008 season is, and you’ve given some good reasons to do so, but ultimately I feel as though all I know is that they were good for 60 games.
So, to clarify, I’m not as concerned about the pressure the team was under in the late-summer games, just that there weren’t enough of them.
by fleerdon on Mar 28, 2009 3:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
This makes sense, though I think the league has de-juiced the ball over the past couple of seasons. Boston’s offense will diminish without Manny. And the Orioles may not get to 825 again.
by odradek on Mar 28, 2009 2:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
No odradek, what they’ve de-juiced is the players.
by mauichuck on Mar 28, 2009 4:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I suspect a little of Column A, a little of Column B. Also, I think organizations were slow to adjust to the offensive explosion and have done a better a job of developing and preserving pitchers in the last five to ten years.
Though I look right at home, I still feel like an exile
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Mar 28, 2009 6:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
When did they start juicing them? Was it 1994?
by odradek on Mar 28, 2009 6:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
My main fear, not completely irrational, is that the team won’t be ready to play for real on opening day. To me that’s Wedgie’s biggest test this year, and one he failed miserably at last year. Many point to first half injuries to explain last year’s slow start, but I remember the strong impression that the team was simply not mentally or physically ready to hit the ground running on opening day.
Slow starts have been a problem for Wedge’s teams, and he needs to have this team competitive from the getgo. No waiting until the pressure’s off to start playing well.
by mcrose on Mar 28, 2009 10:36 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
It may very well be possible that we’ve got better hitters waiting in the wings than we do on the opening day 25-man, but I submit that it’s incumbent upon them to demonstrate that. I also submit, however, that all of this goes out the window once the games start. I mean, a major issue in the presidential campaign was high gas prices.
by fleerdon on Mar 28, 2009 11:03 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I was thinking about this. Having LaPorta or Crowe or possibly even Valbuena or Santana available at some point this season could help this offense a lot. If Hafner continues to look bad, or if Dellucci shows no sign of life—and if ay of the above is hitting in Columbus or Akron—I can’t see Wedge waiting 50 games to play somebody else.
by odradek on Mar 28, 2009 2:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You should also include Brantley in that group as well when mentioning the Columbus players – he likely would be an option as well, provided he continues to display the skills he has shown so far in hIs Minor League career. Someone like Hodges could possibly even factor in if he hits well enough and there’s an opening (i.e. we have poor production at 3B and 1B, which hopefully won’t be the case).
The "cream of the crop" doesn't always rise to the top.
by indiansfan on Mar 29, 2009 3:09 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don’t think Brantley belongs in a list of players who could help our 2009 offense — I am a big Brantley fan, but he appears to be undercooked. He had a 793 OPS in Double-A last year — that’s an MLE of 651 — and I don’t think there would have been much carping had the Indians planned to have him start the year in Double-A again. Now it may turn out that (a) he was slowed by injuries to the tune of 100 points of OPS or more, and (b) he’s now perfectly healthy with no lingering effects. In that case, he might — might — be able to help the 2009 Indians at the plate. But those are two gigantic “ifs” leading up to a “might.”
For that matter, Santana is unlikely to hit well enough this year to play anything but catcher, and he’s unlikely to hit as well (equivalently) to displace one of our present catchers. Crowe’s best opportunity will come if the Indians conclude not that he’ll hit better than Dellucci, but that he couldn’t hit any worse.
If offense alone is the question, then LaPorta and Valbuena offer the most likely assistance from below.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Mar 29, 2009 11:28 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hello Jay,
I can understand that point – if they’re better than the guys we currently have. I can see why Santana certainly would not seem a likely choice to help the Indians’ offense in 2009, being that both Victor and Shoppach are ahead of him, and it’s likely Toregas or Gimenez would get a chance before Santana would.
The main reason I’m thinking Brantley or Crowe would have better (albeit, only slightly better) chances than Santana is because of the presence of Dellucci, plus the question marks surrounding Francisco (can he consistently produce), Choo (both health and whether he can consistently produce), and Barfield (can he hit enough to justify leaving him in the Majors all season, though the fact he can play some INF positions helps to take some pressure off of him offensively).
Granted, LaPorta looks like the better bet with his power and the fact he’s had a great spring (though so has Brantley, and most reports suggest that Crowe hasn’t had a “bad” spring, though not at the level of the two previously mentioned). I think my thinking is the fact that there are question marks surrounding 2-4 of our OFers, not just Dellucci, and obviously, LaPorta can’t take more than one spot (though if he hits well enough, perhaps he could make up for 2-3 weaker bats, but let’s hope that he doesn’t have to).
Just my 2 cents.
The "cream of the crop" doesn't always rise to the top.
by indiansfan on Mar 29, 2009 5:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It’s a common fallacy that people fall into. The fact that our veteran major leaguer sucks does not make any particular prospect any better. I always go back to 2005, when some fans were demanding to see Gutierrez in Cleveland because Blake sucked so bad — never mind that Gutierrez was hitting — in Akron — than Blake was in Cleveland. No, no, the veteran sucks … this other guy (who hasn’t pissed me off yet) has just got to be better!
LaPorta had an MLE of 720 last year, Crowe was 704, everyone else was lower. It’s accurate to say that these guys provide valuable and viable depth for our lineup. It is not accurate to say they can be expected to provide upgrades to the lineup it this season — and the only exception to that is Dellucci/LaPorta.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Mar 29, 2009 6:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
If you had to put odds on LaPorta displacing Francisco or Garko by July, what would you think?
Based on nothing other than his Huntsville stats and the pure slugger skill set he possesses, I just don’t think he needs six months in AAA. And he’s young, but not that young—if he hits his way up, they had better make room for him.
Though I look right at home, I still feel like an exile
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Mar 29, 2009 9:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
They had better make room for him … or else what?
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Mar 30, 2009 12:18 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
LaPorta will start hanging around with Tomo Ohka and Stephen Head, poisoning the Columbus clubhouse.
by afh4 on Mar 30, 2009 1:17 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You wouldn’t like me when I’m angry.
Though I look right at home, I still feel like an exile
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Mar 30, 2009 7:39 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
He gets the dreaded “bored in Buffalo” syndrome that destroyed Marte and Brandon Phillips.
by odradek on Mar 30, 2009 10:41 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
um, LaPorta’s been a pro for like, not much time at all.
by Brick. on Mar 30, 2009 11:35 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Also, a large factor motivating the move from Buffalo to Columbus was the associated change from “bored in Buffalo” to “captivated in Columbus”
by APV on Mar 30, 2009 11:38 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
i heard brad will be hosting ice cream socials for the guys every friday night during homestands.
by Brick. on Mar 30, 2009 11:43 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
“Come on, fellows, cheer up! Columbus ain’t so bad. Who’s for another maraschino cherry?”
by odradek on Mar 30, 2009 7:30 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
Dear Abby,
I don’t want your advice; I just wanted to let you know how exciting it is playing professional baseball here in the capital city of the great state of Ohio. Our team is named after a boat. It’s seriously awesome. Your job really sucks compared to mine. Just so you know.
-Captivated in Columbus
P.S. Tell Miss Manners I set my fork on the right at dinner last night. I didn’t really, of course, but I love messing with that woman.
by Logodaedalus on Mar 30, 2009 12:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’m Disconcerted in the District right now
by jhon on Mar 30, 2009 1:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
opening day 2008
Cleveland Indians AB R H RBI BB SO BA OPS Pit PO A Details G Sizemore CF 4 1 1 1 1 1 .250 1.400 15 1 0 HR,IW J Michaels LF 4 1 0 0 1 1 .000 .200 16 1 0 T Hafner DH 4 1 1 1 0 2 .250 .750 12 0 0 2B V Martinez C 2 1 2 1 0 0 1.000 2.000 7 3 0 --K Shoppach C 2 1 1 0 0 1 .500 1.000 10 9 0 J Peralta SS 4 2 2 0 0 1 .500 1.000 16 1 3 R Garko 1B 4 0 1 0 0 2 .250 .500 20 9 0 A Cabrera 2B 4 1 0 1 0 1 .000 .000 19 1 3 F Gutierrez RF 3 2 3 3 1 0 1.000 3.000 15 0 0 HR C Blake 3B 4 0 1 3 0 0 .250 .750 12 2 3 2B Totals 35 10 12 10 3 9 142 27 10
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Mar 28, 2009 11:19 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
this game was AWESOME.
Travis Hafner is overrated. Clarity is underrated. David Dellucci is David Dellucci.
by westbrook on Mar 28, 2009 12:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
God yes – Frankie had lit it up in ST and it looked like he was gonna carry it thru to the regular season. It lasted 2 or 3 games.
by mcrose on Mar 28, 2009 12:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Note Shoppach in for Vic – pretty sure this is where Martinez’s problems started.
by mauichuck on Mar 28, 2009 2:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yep, he injured his hamstring on Opening Day, and wasn’t the same until September.
by Ryan on Mar 28, 2009 2:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It’s better to have your team play well in September than in April. Not just if you care about postseason play, but because it is easier to bear. Mcrose touches on something I am reluctant to mention: the toughness aspect. This isn’t football, but the Indians under Wedge seem to be a psychologically fragile team (last season’s start, 2005’s finish, 2006, 2007 ALCS, the team’s general fold job against the NL). I know it isn’t reasonable to assign these failings to the manager, though he may have something to do with it.
by odradek on Mar 28, 2009 2:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
This is total and complete BS.
If the team isn’t 100% successful all the time, then it can be called a “fold job” i.e. a choke. They closed the deal in the 2007 division race, decisively I might add. They closed the deal against the Yankees — both in the overall series and specifically in Game Two, where the whole course of the series was changed in an inning. They played .700 ball in the heat of a pennant race for over a month in 2005, faltered only for a few days. Even in the ALCS, they won all the close games — when they started losing, it was basically a total collapse:
Game 1 – lost 10-3
Game 2 – won 13-6, but the score was tied from the 6th until the 11th
Game 3 – won 4-2, pivotal game
Game 4 – won 7-3, broke open a tie game with a 7-run 5th
Game 5 – lost 7-1, Sabathia broke way before Beckett
Game 6 – lost 12-2, trailed 10-1 after the third
Game 7 – lost 11-2 after nearly tying the score in the 7th
Where exactly is the “fold job” here? You’ve got pitchers who couldn’t hold it together beyond the first 170 games, but the nature of these things is that we give no credit for the fortitude it takes to outlast almost every other team, then excoriate when the team finally gets beat.
This is sheer stupidity — a very common and understandable stupidity, but ultimately stupidity just the same. And while we’re being stupid, let’s take note of our biggest 2005 final-week “choker” — Coco Crisp — and our biggest 2007 posteason choker — C.C. Sabathia — both no longer with the club, so surely this is not an issue anymore.
Back to reality: The team’s biggest problems contending have been putting together a consistent offensive attack in the first two months — we saw this both in 2005 and in 2008. I have zero concerns about the way they perform in a tough spot, in the clutch. Their track record is excellent when the pressure is on.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Mar 28, 2009 4:51 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
I said I was reluctant to mention it because I don’t really believe it myself, with the exception of the final week in 2005 when the team freaked out over the Rays and the White Sox.
The fold job in the ALCS was conducted by Sabathia. And over the past few seasons, maybe the way they’ve performed in interleague play, when they act as if it’s not fair they have to play the Reds and Padres.
Clearly, because such events are subjective and are often identified incorrectly, there’s a lot of abuse about it. But I still think it happens, rarely.
by odradek on Mar 28, 2009 6:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hello Jay,
I agree with you and the others who have mentioned that the Indians must get off to better starts to the season, especially offensively. Outside of 2007, this team has started slow and put themselves in a hole – it would be nice if we “hit the ground running” offensively to start the season and keep it going – I think that would also help to take the pressure off of the pitching staff, where there appear to be several question marks (particularly with the rotation – I sure hope Lee’s “sub-par” Spring outings are just his working on things and fine-tuning for the season – I would think and hope that he would start getting locked into things in his final few Spring outings).
Just my 2 cents.
The "cream of the crop" doesn't always rise to the top.
by indiansfan on Mar 29, 2009 3:13 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
To be fair, team didn’t put themselves in a hole at the start of last season, but they didn’t take advantage of great starting pitching. The Tribe was 14-15 on May 1, and they were 22-19 and in first place heading into Cincinnati, where they lost 4-3, 4-2 and 6-4, followed by three losses to the White Sox 4-1, 7-2 and 3-1. And from then on, the offense was truly in a funk, wasting great starting pitching for almost all of May. Amazing starting pitching, really.
by odradek on Mar 29, 2009 3:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe the Indians are a bunch of emotionally fragile animals, but Wedge made them tough – as a result, they were successful the last few months of 2008. It’s just as probable, really.
/glass half full
/spring training discussions
by Thommy on Mar 30, 2009 1:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
fyi, several people, including myself, predicted the team would start playing better once our best pitcher was traded to a playoff contender.
And it wasn’t because Wedgie’s toughness biscuits would get distributed at that point.
by mcrose on Mar 30, 2009 3:20 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Was it because the team had thrown in the towel and officially conceded they weren’t going to try to win the pennant?
by odradek on Mar 30, 2009 7:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
short answer yes, altho there was a lot of factors leading up to that point.
There was an immense amount of pressure coming off ’07 to “make the next step”. The tightness on the team was palpable. It was not a tough prediction to make that they would play looser and better once that pressure was removed.
by mcrose on Mar 31, 2009 12:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, I’m with you on that. My conjecture is that Wedge has them all wrapped so tight in the clubhouse they can’t even bend over.
by odradek on Mar 31, 2009 8:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh, you Photoshop people and your Photoshop…
by Logodaedalus on Apr 1, 2009 7:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
By the way, is the right column of the site taking absolutely FOREVER to load for anyone else? It’s been like that for me since yesterday, and I’ve started just clicking FANPOSTS at the top instead of waiting.
Travis Hafner is overrated. Clarity is underrated. David Dellucci is David Dellucci.
by westbrook on Mar 28, 2009 12:05 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Yes, and the ad covers the top two fanposts.
by SuddenSam on Mar 28, 2009 3:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Once again, I say Firefox with AdBlocker.
by woodsmeister on Mar 28, 2009 4:26 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Well, you didn’t mention Droobs in your post. He’s maturing and could have a break-out year this season.
I’m not as concerned about the poor stats and our ST record as I would have been in the past. Everything this year is different. New facility, new field, Cactus vs. Grapefruit, longer ST, etc. Some of this probably has an affect. But as lackluster as our play has been, you have to admit, a few unexpected names have made the most of their limited at bats: Lombard, Espino, Aubrey, Pinckney, Contstanza… And Chulk has been solid!
My biggest fantasy is that Fausto wins a third straight Cy Young for the Tribe (er, second biggest, biggest is a World Championship).
Part of my lack of panic is a growing confidence in the front office and Wedge. I like the team they’ve assembled, and I’m excited about what we’ve got in Columbus. In fact in April, given the choice, I’d rather see the Clippers play than the Indians.
by LeftyCatcher on Mar 29, 2009 5:25 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Droobs is my pick for a breakout, although Peralta is mounting an impressive challenge for that pick. Asdrubal has always survived challenges and bounced back stronger from demotions, and for a player who reached the majors before his 22nd birthday, 23 is a perfectly good age to explode.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Mar 29, 2009 6:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Your Cleveland vs. Columbus challenge is interesting … the more talented guys are still in Cleveland, although it depends on positioning.
Just for kicks, I decided to rank all of our talent in Double-A, Triple-A and MLB. This “talent” ranking is basically a blend of each player’s value in 2009 and long-term potential, so for the prospects, it’s neither their present value (which would be too low) or their ceiling (which would be too high). Guys starting the season in Columbus are in bold, and guys starting in Akron are in italics.
1. Sizemore
2. Lee
3. Martinez
4. Carmona
5. Peralta
6. Santana
7. Cabrera
8. Wood
9. Choo
10. LaPorta
11. Perez
12. Shoppach
13. Huff
14. DeRosa
15. Hafner
16. Laffey
17. Valbuena
18. Reyes
19. Weglarz
20. Betancourt
21. SLewis
22. Brantley
23. Smith
24. JLewis
25. Rondon
26. Carroll
27. Garko
28. Pavano
29. Mills
30. Sowers
31. Barfield
32. Rivero
33. Gimenez
34. Francisco
35. Sipp
36. Crowe
37. Meloan
38. Marte
39. De La Cruz
40. Hodges
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Mar 29, 2009 7:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
My comment that in April I’d prefer to see a game in Columbus than in Cleveland is the sum of a lot of things.
First, I already know most of the Cleveland players and the first four weeks of the MLB season are weird because slumps and hot streaks seem bigger in April. I’m especially anxious to see the new players we picked up last year and they play in Columbus.
Of course, the Clippers only play 9 games in Columbus in April…
by LeftyCatcher on Mar 29, 2009 7:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That’s a good list. I wouldn’t quibble with one of them.
by odradek on Mar 29, 2009 8:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think Brantley should be higher than Weglarz, but it’s probably just because of all the Brant-love.
by NickFantana on Mar 29, 2009 9:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That’s true. Weglarz is really underrated in these parts.
Though I look right at home, I still feel like an exile
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Mar 29, 2009 10:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Or a bit overhyped elsewhere.
Weglarz is slightly ahead because his power potential is considered to be so massive. Brantley is a level ahead and only six months older, but the best thing he does is draw a ton of walks — which Weglarz also does. Brantley with the clear edge on defense and baserunning, but Weglarz’s ceiling as a slugger is just too big to ignore.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Mar 30, 2009 12:25 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Really? I was being sarcastic.
Though I look right at home, I still feel like an exile
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Mar 30, 2009 7:40 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That does make more sense now that you mention it.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Mar 30, 2009 11:15 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
This is interesting. I like the list, and agree with most of the rankings. Minor quibbles, I’d probably rank Hafner a little lower, but he might be the hardest guy to gauge on the whole list. I also think Rivero should be a little higher, but I might be reading too much into his second half.
by ClarkM on Mar 30, 2009 3:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I left out Asdrubal because I really don’t know what to expect. He looked terrible early last year, after I was convinced he was the real thing. But he’s looked good this spring, and his age is on his size (as Jay points out), so maybe he’s due for a solid year. But even so he’s not going to turn into Joe Morgan. What could be expected from a breakout Asdrubal? .289/.369/.477?
by odradek on Mar 29, 2009 8:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Asdrubal’s 90th % per CHONE: .299 / .383 / .459 , or the kind of season that would qualify him for the All-star team and at least a couple of MVP votes (his 50th % has him pretty average with the bat).
For Sickles’ community playing time projection I cast a “Warrior” vote for ‘Droobs (150+ games). I don’t have a clear estimate in mind of how his numbers will turn out, but I trust my instinctive that he’ll play well. He looked pretty darned good last year after he resurfaced, no?
by jhon on Mar 30, 2009 12:19 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
After he came back, he hit .320/.398/.464 in 233 PAs. As Baseball Prospectus’ annual says: “he was arguably the Indians’ best player the rest of the way.” You could say he was as important as Choo.
by odradek on Mar 30, 2009 10:39 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don’t think there is any reason to fret over spring stats. Last years Champions went 12-18-1. All spring training is, is a chance for all the guys to get back into the swing of things. Look at Cliff Lee for example. His strategy is to throw all fastballs and gain control of it for the regular season.
by ClevelandCrazy29 on Mar 29, 2009 8:27 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Are there lots of reasons to fret? Indubitably. Here’s something to take your mind off the pain, courtesy of TJ House:
TP IP H R ER BB SO Hi Avg House, TJ 59 4.0 1 0 0 0 5 93 90
7 groundouts, 5 Ks. Yeah, it’s just one spring start, but a good reason to keep an eye on Lake County every five days.
by FredOx on Mar 30, 2009 2:41 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Also good to hear from Tony that the Chisl is definitely starting in Kinston
by APV on Mar 30, 2009 3:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Damn, Fred. Don’t you know this guy will never make it to the bigs? He’ll get hit by a truck, or mysteriously lose feeling in his pitching hand.
by odradek on Mar 30, 2009 7:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Recently came across an e-mail I sent to Will Carroll in Sept. 2004:
I guess that’s why they say “there’s no such thing as a pitching prospect.” You just never know when one of them will pull a hamstring, blow out an elbow, develop severe back problems, or get shot.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Mar 30, 2009 9:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
TJ House isn’t a pitching prospect. He’s a 19 year old who’ll be fun to watch pitch in Eastlake. He may explode in a bizarre alien probe incident next Tuesday, but he’ll be fun to watch until then.
by FredOx on Mar 30, 2009 10:20 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Let’s hope he’s nothing like JR House.
'Z' button abuser.
by emd2k3 on Mar 30, 2009 11:08 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Let’s hope he’s just like Greg House.
Though I look right at home, I still feel like an exile
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Mar 31, 2009 12:31 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
A rupture of the A-4 pulley in the tendon sheath. It bowstrings from the bones and decreases flexion power. It explains everything!
Though I look right at home, I still feel like an exile
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Mar 31, 2009 11:20 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Also, Jeanmar Gomez has 18 K’s in 13 IP, quite a departure from last year.
by mcrose on Mar 31, 2009 12:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Updating some numbers posted earlier, Carlos Santana’s minor league camp line (26 PA) is now .455/.538/.727. Is it safe to say the Eastern League should look out, or are minor league March stats beyond irrelevant?
by FredOx on Mar 31, 2009 3:07 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’m thinking both.
"...leading the league in most offensive categories. Including nose hairs."
by sarcasmdave on Apr 1, 2009 7:35 AM EDT 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.
