Game 124: Indians 10, Royals 6
by Ryan on Aug 25, 2009 12:27 AM EDT
in Game Recaps
240 comments
It's been really fun watching this team over the past couple weeks. Matt LaPorta was finally brought back, this time to stay. Chris Perez and Jess Todd, both received from St. Louis for Mark DeRosa, have quickly become the seventh and eighth inning men in the bullpen. After getting regular playing time, Andy Marte is starting to hit. And Luis Valbuena has hit .297/.360/.495 since the All-Star Break. Some year I wish I felt this good about this team early rather than late.
Tonight's game was a contrast in rebuilding teams. The Indians cratered in June, and despite a couple of roster-rending trades, have slowly but steadily improved since then. The Royals, on the other hand, started well but have inexorably sunk since. The pitching staff that carried an inept offense has stumbled, and that fall off has taken the rest of the team with them.
Gil Meche, who hadn't even pitched into the seventh inning since the middle of June, went seven tonight. Royals manager Trey Hillman, knowing how bad the Kansas City bullpen has been, elected to have closer Joakim Soria attempt a two-inning save. The move, like many others he attempted tonight, backfired in a spectacular way. After Soria retired Shin-Soo Choo, the next three Indians reached, culminating in a Luis Valbuena lead-taking three run homer. The Indians would add another three in the ninth off the Royals relievers who probably would have pitched the eighth, somewhat vindicating Hillman's strategy. In that frame, Asdrubal Cabrera showed like he was going to lay down a sacrifice bunt, but instead pulled the bat back a line a breaking ball down the line, scoring the runners he was going to move over.
Jeremy Sowers pitched well until the fifth, where he allowed a quick four runs to score. He did stick around through the seventh inning, but by that time he had given up a fifth run, and left trailing 5-4. Thanks to the Indian rally off Soria, he came out with a win, but he didn't pitch well considering the opposition.
Next Up: Masterson vs. Greinke, 8:10 PM
| Highest WPA | Lowest WPA | ||
| Luis Valbuena | .405 | Jeremy Sowers | -.325 |
| Pronk | .399 | Kelly Shoppach | -.123 |
| Shin-Soo Choo | .192 | Grady Sizemore | -.069 |
0 recs |
240 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
Hillman sure looked like a doofus tonight, what with the bunting with one out and not having Soria ready to pitch the eighth. As bad as Wedge is, you can do worse. Same goes for Dayton Moore. At least the Indians don’t have Yunievsky Betancourt. At least the Indians had talent to trade away at the trading deadline.
This is totally impressionistic, and I have only seen parts of our last several games, but every time I see Valbuena bat it seems like he’s hitting the ball really hard, even when he makes an out. It’s great to see most of the guys we want to see develop getting significant playing time, finally.
"Lotta heart in Cleveland." - Ian Hunter
by Denver Tribe Fan on Aug 25, 2009 1:22 AM EDT reply actions
he mashes… he’s ISO-ing something like .190, which is fantastic for a MIF… HOWEVER, his defense is pretty suspect… at least at this point
by gorilla_baller on Aug 25, 2009 10:13 AM EDT up reply actions
Man, they should have traded Greinke before the deadline. I wonder if the return would still be worth it this offseason. There just aren’t pieces to feel confident about going forward.
And I might make that recap pic my avatar. Strongly considering it anyway. So tender. So strong.
Steel Nick
Does anyone else get a pretty good feeling about next season?
Bullpen — check.
Starting pitching — coming along with some actual possibilities in the wings.
Position guys — the Indians are going to be very solid up the middle. And for anyone ripping the Tribe for recent trades, look no further than Choo, Cabrera and Valbuena. Is Pronk actually going to be better one year removed from his injury or was last night just a tease? Don’t know, but these young guys are sure beginning to look impressive.
Bullpen — check.
Man, I’m not falling for that again.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Aug 25, 2009 9:16 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Eh, I’m still worried about the front end of the rotation. For the first time in a long time, there is no clear catcher for the start of the season. We still need either a 1B or a LF, depending on where LaPorta sticks.
Still, I do feel better than I did a month ago.
by Ryan Kelsey on Aug 25, 2009 11:07 AM EDT up reply actions
Marte*
"It's all part of life's rich pageant, you know?" - Inspector Clouseau
by woodsmeister on Aug 25, 2009 12:31 PM EDT up reply actions
there is no clear catcher for the start of the season.
This reminds me of when Manny left, and people said that Thome “wasn’t a real cleanup hitter.” Yes, the guy now closing in on 600 HR … not a “real cleanup hitter.”
Say what you will about Shoppach, but he’ll end the year with about 36 home runs over the past two seasons, in something a little less than “regular” playing time. It is downright foolish to propose that we don’t have a clear incumbent at that position.
Even if we trade Shoppach, Marson is a very solid candidate to step in as a rookie. Or do we no longer believe in playing the kids?
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
I’m not saying we don’t have options. But Shoppach hasn’t even ensured himself the role for the rest of the season, so at the very least, I see a 4-way competition going into next year.
Of course, they are 4 butts just keeping the seat warm for Mr. Santana.
by Ryan Kelsey on Aug 25, 2009 12:45 PM EDT up reply actions
Shoppach is great.
seriously?
I reserve the right to complain about Gimenez at 1B and Carroll in the OF, no matter the facts. - FredOx
by DontCallMeJoey on Aug 25, 2009 6:12 PM EDT up reply actions
No, we don’t. If there is one thing this past season has taught me, it would be that the Indians cannot have enough depth. Anywhere.
I see Shoppach, Marson, Toregas and Gimenez, with Santana starting in Columbus. Two of those three will likely be in Cleveland, one backing up Santana at Columbus. Gimenez can probably get enough time at Columbus playing all over the place, or in Cleveland as a 24th man. So I suppose there is room for everyone, but as catchers, I see one too many.
Will Shoppach be with the team in the spring? I remember last year we were willing to trade him for Masterson. I think we’ve over-valued Shopp for some time now, not that he’s value-less, but look who we had to trade to get Masterson.
To get Masterson and 3 other players.
"It's all part of life's rich pageant, you know?" - Inspector Clouseau
by woodsmeister on Aug 25, 2009 2:47 PM EDT up reply actions
I don’t know….Shoppach is due for a raise through arbitration, whereas all of those others are league minimum guys. I kind of hope they go with Shoppach and Marson, keep Toregas at AAA, and put Gimenez wherever his utility role fits betweeen Columbus and Cleveland.
See, I kinda hope that they trade Shoppach to fill a hole, go with Toregas and Marsno on the big league club with Gimenez wherever he fits. Nothing against Shoppach, but does anyone think he’s here past next year anyway?
I just wanted to believe.
Well, we know what we’d get out of Shop. Has Marson made his ML debut yet? I could live with a Shop/Marson/Toregas committee until Vic’s little brother is ready . I don’t see much trade value right now unless a contender’s catcher breaks a finger and needs someone right now.
Any time I start to feel down about this season, I think about Royals fans and I feel much better. We may be having a down year but we’re miles ahead of the Royals, not only in the majors but our entire system. I don’t know how a team can be so bad for so long (and have so many high draft picks) and still have that terrible of a farm system. Not that I know much about them specifically, but I hear enough from Neyer and Posnanski to know how completely terrible that entire organization is. The Betancourt trade is the perfect example.
I think it was Rany Jazayerli who made this point, but the Royals have not had a single player make their major league debut this entire year. How ridiculous is that. They’re in last place, have the worst run differential in the AL, and they’re still sticking with the same veterens who got them there. I know they don’t have a ton of prospects, but suppposedly there are a couple guys in AAA worth a look. You’d think they would at least try two or three young guys to see what they can do.
Their entire organization has been awful this decade, no matter who the GM or the manager has been. Neyer wrote about this yesterday, and says the blame has to start at the top. If the Dolans get so much crap from Cleveland fans, I can only wonder what people must be saying about David Glass in KC.
But they don’t have any young guys in AAA to try. Their best hitter in Omaha, Cory Aldridge, was born in 1979. Kila Ka’aihue and Tug Hulett aren’t young either, aren’t that good, and wouldn’t be making their major league debuts anyway.
I guess that’s the point, that their minor league system is so void of any prospects close to the majors. But you’d think they could at least try some different players rather than the retreads they’re running out there every game. Also, I was under the impression that Ka’aihue hadn’t made his MLB debut yet.
by Buckeye Brad on Aug 25, 2009 10:13 AM EDT up reply actions
Speaking of the futility of the Royals, Joe Posnanski looks like he’s finally lost it:
Lots more to say on this as the week goes on … but something crystalized for me while watching the Kansas City Royals lose to Cleveland tonight. And it is something a bit surprising for me. I have seen a lot of bad baseball since coming to Kansas City in 1996. I have seen a 19-game losing streak, and players head for the dugout while a fly ball were still in mid-air and a centerfielder climb the wall on a ground-rule double that bounced 5 feet in front of him. I have seen a team so bad they did not have a single starter with an ERA lower than 5.00. I have seen a team so bad they started someone no one ever heard of — including players on the team — at Yankee Stadium. I have seen a team so bad that the first baseman simply quit in the middle of the year.
So I say this while knowing precisely what the words mean …
This is the worst Kansas City Royals team I have ever seen.
by Buckeye Brad on Aug 25, 2009 10:20 PM EDT up reply actions
That’s the most soul-crushing thing for the Royals fans. This was supposed to be the start of their “window” of success. They spent some money in the offseason to fill out their team, but it was all on worthless talent.
The beginning of the season just seemed like a cruel joke being played on them.
Not to sound like a broken record, but the Royals have won a WS in my lifetime. I think our franchise has a much more solid foundation for being competitive going forward, but I don’t feel sorry for KC fans at all. Not a bit.
"Lotta heart in Cleveland." - Ian Hunter
by Denver Tribe Fan on Aug 25, 2009 9:54 AM EDT up reply actions
Damn you and your youth.
"Lotta heart in Cleveland." - Ian Hunter
by Denver Tribe Fan on Aug 25, 2009 1:45 PM EDT up reply actions
Just off the top of my head, I can’t recall the Royals ever making an attempt to restock the system with talent through any kind of “fire sales.” Which is ridiculous considering how many years they knew they wouldn’t compete. Through the last few seasons they didn’t have to trade Greinke, but we know well enough that if you trade enough Broussards you’re going to have something worth watching eventually.
Steel Nick
They in fact should have traded Greinke already. Can you imagine what they would have gotten for him?
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
In the last five years, the best deadline deals the Royals made netted them Joey Gathright and Odalis Perez. They don’t seem to play that game for some reason.
Shapiro should be allowed to hire himself out to other teams to make trades for them, with the fees going to the Indians. That’s how they make up the $16 million loss.
by cleveland teamer on Aug 25, 2009 12:16 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Absolutely they should have. I’m imagining some kind of devil’s advocate explaining that you shouldn’t trade their best chip, Greinke, because he’s young enough to be on future contenders. I’m just saying even if you believe that they could still have plenty of upper-minor or major league talent infused into the system by now.
Steel Nick
WE’VE GOT A FIRE!!!!
SALE.
This is Victor's home. Victor Jose, you too.
by westbrook on Aug 25, 2009 12:24 PM EDT up reply actions 3 recs
i think their failure to net anything from dye, damon, beltran can partially explain some of their reticence to participate in trades… teahan might have been the best they received for any of those three
i’m not saying that they should stop trading because of a few poor decisions, but this might partially explain the unwillingness on their part
by gorilla_baller on Aug 25, 2009 12:25 PM EDT up reply actions
That does not mean he has not done a considerable amount of damage in his short tenure.
"It's all part of life's rich pageant, you know?" - Inspector Clouseau
by woodsmeister on Aug 25, 2009 12:32 PM EDT up reply actions
It was in response to this:
i think their failure to net anything from dye, damon, beltran can partially explain some of their reticence to participate in trades
As in, Dayton Moore did not make any of those trades.
Steel Nick
i agree with that… but how on earth could you sell to the fanbase a trade that gives up greinke when all they can remember is the lack of return from those previous trades?
by gorilla_baller on Aug 25, 2009 1:49 PM EDT up reply actions
I wasn’t aware the fanbase needs to approve trades.
How did Shapiro sell the fanbase on trading Colon? He didn’t. He just made the deal.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
They don’t. My point was never that trades have to be approved by fans nor that the Royals should shy away from making trades.
All I was doing was positing one possible reason why they might hesitate in parting with Greinke. Whether it’s Moore now or Baird three years ago doing the dealing, I was simply pointing out one possibility.
It’s far more likely that a combination of Greinke’s youth and club control for a reasonable price (he avoided arbitration by signing a deal that makes him a Royal until 2012 while making peanuts in ’09 and ’10 with a big jump to 13.5 mm in ’11 and ’12). That is what will keep him a Royal.
by gorilla_baller on Aug 25, 2009 2:37 PM EDT up reply actions
I wonder if a team like the Royals actually makes that decision – the not good one – as part of being a not good franchise, valuing his (nonexistent) attendance draw over any trade value.
I think as a rule it comes from GMs not being realistic about medium-term chances to contend, and owners who prefer to hear the sunnier side of all future-year projections. It’s no fun tearing things down and admitting you won’t win for two or three years, and most owners don’t buy sports franchises in order to exercise their delayed gratification skills.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
Either Manning or Hegan said last night: If they trade Greinke (their only trading chip), they can close down the upper deck.
Well, if Manning or Hegan said it, then it must be right.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
Yes, but of course they’re entirely empty when Greinke isn’t the starter.
Of course, our own upper decks have been closed continuously since Albert Belle left. In fact, we had to build new upper decks, just to have upper decks to close, when Manny and Jim and Omar left.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Aug 25, 2009 2:51 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
our own upper decks have been closed continuously since Albert Belle left.
That was just to protect the fans from being hit by balls he threw.
"Lotta heart in Cleveland." - Ian Hunter
by Denver Tribe Fan on Aug 25, 2009 3:19 PM EDT up reply actions
I can see merit to exploring the possibility of trading Greinke. If they could net a Cliff Lee-esque haul (or better) than they would have a few close-to-ready minor leaguers.
Between Duffy, Cortes, and Danny Gutierrez, the Royals already have a few intriguing arms that are a couple of years away at least. Plus they’re all HS or Latin American signings, so they could use some seasoning.
Pawn Guillen, Olivo, and Jacobs for anything young and athletic and hopefully have a couple successful drafts.
It’s not out of the question that they could time up this group of minor leaguers plus the bounty from a Greinke trade to all come up at the same time.
In a central division with lots of turnover, that might be enough to compete.
by gorilla_baller on Aug 25, 2009 2:57 PM EDT up reply actions
That’s definitely the more realistic view. They need a lot of things to go right for them to compete. But even though it’s a lot to ask for, it’s not completely out of the question.
by gorilla_baller on Aug 25, 2009 3:01 PM EDT up reply actions
Cliff Lee-esque haul
Come on now, we made a pretty good trade. But it isn’t the gold standard.
This is Victor's home. Victor Jose, you too.
I was just using it for comparison’s sake.
But I’ve heard people say we should have insisted on getting Brown or Taylor in return, but I like the deal — minus Marson. He seemed superfluous in every way.
I like Knapp’s upside (even if ends up repeating the tale of Adam Miller).
I like that we bought Donald while he was low and I think he could fill a Derosa-lite role.
I like that Carrasco’s ERA scared a lot of people off. Maybe the scouting reports are right and his stuff has diminished, but he was still getting a healthy dose of K’s while sporting a career low in LOB%.
by gorilla_baller on Aug 25, 2009 3:51 PM EDT up reply actions
Adam Miller doesn’t exist.
The once and future
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Aug 25, 2009 4:35 PM EDT up reply actions
Check back in a year or two, it may well be the new standard.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
Didn’t we get extremely lucky in the Colon trade, too?
I propose giving Victor a 2012 World Series ring.
by Gradyforpresident on Aug 25, 2009 5:52 PM EDT up reply actions
The centerpiece of that deal wasn’t a pitcher with high upside/risk.
This is Victor's home. Victor Jose, you too.
I think we need to get away from the idea that every trade has to have a “centerpiece.” Trades have value…sometimes that value is distributed primarily in one player, sometimes it isn’t.
I don’t think Knapp was really the centerpiece. I think Knapp was emphasized only because Shapiro felt that his value would not immediately be well understood if he didn’t emphasize it. The other three guys were all BA Top 100 and clearly big-league ready.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
Well, no, but I don’t think anyone had Grady pegged this highly when the deal was made.
I propose giving Victor a 2012 World Series ring.
by Gradyforpresident on Aug 25, 2009 6:06 PM EDT up reply actions
I don’t mean in terms of how it “turns out,” which would be the luck part.
I’m saying, this return, as presently valued, may be the new standard in deadline deals for a star. As I have mentioned before, the deal is underrated in that it’s four good prospects and zero throw-ins. Even if none of them is valued as highly as LaPorta, all four are better than Zachson or Bryson, and a couple of them are better than Brantley.
Here’s a quick ranking:
1. LaPorta
2. Carrasco
3. Marson
4. Brantley
5. Knapp
6. Donald
7. Zachson
8. Bryson
Couple of notes here. First, my rankings are econometrically biased compared to others — always — because big-league value is the only value that matters. Knapp is #5 because however awesome he might someday be, he’s more likely to have a career ending injury by 2013 than a big-league career. Sorry, but that’s the brutal truth. Second, the gap between Donald and Zachson is huge — Donald is closer in value to LaPorta than to Zachson.
Anyway, old standard: #1, #4, #7, #8.
New standard: #2, #3, #5, #6.
This trade is better than people think. We got four real prospects here, which is two more than we got for C.C.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Aug 25, 2009 6:04 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
You have some kind of positional crush on catchers, Jay. I can’t say I see eye-to-eye with you on Marson.
The once and future
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Aug 25, 2009 6:14 PM EDT up reply actions
Very few players can catch, and very few of those can hit. In the majors this year, only 7 catchers have put up an wOBA over .336. Marson had a .346 wOBA with the Phillies AAA team at the time of the trade. And he is still just a few months past his 23rd birthday. He may never have beans for power, but he might put up an OBP of .400 if he develops.
Thank you!
Manhat: What I have is a clear-eyed view of positional value.
Marson is less than a year older than Brantley and a better hitter — not just this year in Triple-A, but he was also about 100 OPS points ahead in Double-A. The scouterazzi prefer Marson, too — Top 50 per MLB.com and Top 100 per BA. Marson plays the toughest skill position where Brantley might be a fringy in center field, basically the middle of the defensive spectrum.
I’m the author of much of the LGT hype for Brantley, and I’m telling you, Marson is just as good of a prospect and probably better.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
I’m the author of much of the LGT hype for Brantley, and I’m telling you, Marson is just as good of a prospect and probably better.
I completely understand what you’re saying, but gasp.
Steel Nick
We’ve been spoiled both coming and going with excellent hitting catchers recently.
When I look at Marson, I mostly see a guy who needs to hit .300 to be an elite hitter, and whose window to do that—based on the demands of the position—isn’t real wide.
I also don’t see eye-to-eye with you on “Manhat.”
The once and future
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Aug 26, 2009 10:10 AM EDT up reply actions
You’re right, Man Hat, better with a space.
by Logodaedalus on Aug 26, 2009 12:27 PM EDT up reply actions
Well it should be twice as good.
Really, Donald is closer in value to LaPorta than to Zachson? I don’t see this at all. You really think Donald is a starter-level player?
And calling Rob Bryson a non-prospect, at least before the big injury, is a stretch.
Bryson was a relief prospect, and not a particularly young one, four levels below the majors.
As for Donald and LaPorta, consider their 2008 seasons. Both were in Double-A and basically the same age — Donald is four months older. LaPorta had a 924 OPS, Donald had an 889 OPS. Defensively, LaPorta is at best a decent left fielder, while Donald is at best a good shortstop. LaPorta is way ahead based on the scouting, but considering positional value, Donald’s performance in 2008 was better.
Zach Jackson was not much of a prospect even if we got him — was he ever even a Top 300 guy? Donald was #68 (or something like that) just a few months ago. Yes, I think Donald is definitely closer to LaPorta than to Zachson.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
Bryson was in his age 20 season, destroying low A. I swear that you have a typo in his birthdate somewhere on a spreadsheet.
I see what you are saying about Donald – the obvious question being how much damage he’s done this year, with his sub-Brantley performance.
Regardless, it’s one thing to say that the Lee group is better than the CC group, but another to see that it’s a better return considering we traded another whole year of Lee. Or maybe you aren’t saying that.
No, I’m not saying that. I am saying that there has been a shift in the standard, because teams are valuing advanced prospects very, very highly now. This is one reason we loaded up on pitchers with, at most, a month or two in Double-A; teams are over-valuing anyone more advanced than that and possibly under-valuing less advanced guys.
The Sabathia deal was the old standard — it’s understood that the Colon deal was a unique situation and represents an unreasonable expectation. Conventional wisdom is that Shapiro had to settle for a lot less than that for Cliff Lee, because the market had changed, or perhaps because he simply failed to get a better offer.
I think eventually, people may figure out that the Lee prospects are actually just as valuable as the Sabathia prospects, or at least it’s a lot closer than people think right now. Guys like LaPorta maybe untouchable in the new market, and the Lee deal may set a new standard of how to clean up without getting a LaPorta.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
I am actually starting to wonder if we should hold off on ranking the Cliff and Victor deals below the CC deal. Pitching appears to be the name of the game and we are stockpiling arms with upside. Could this be the correct change in philosophy? If so, then I think you would have to rate both deals above the CC deal if they pan out. You do have to factor in the flame-out effect of pitching prospects.
Nobody is taking Guillen with that contract.
by Buckeye Brad on Aug 25, 2009 4:24 PM EDT up reply actions
somehow in my head i thought it was in the 8-10 mm range… and guillen is pretty bad and injury-prone
by gorilla_baller on Aug 25, 2009 4:27 PM EDT up reply actions
I understand. My point is that even though Dayton Moore did not make any of those trades, he’s done little to make the Royals better since he started. Jose Guillen? Yuniesky Betancourt? The team is full of mediocre, generally underperforming veterans. There is no hope in sight, and Dayton Moore is at least partially responsible. His cupboard may have been bare, but he’s done little to replenish it except sign middling veterans who couldn’t get a job elsewhere for whatever reason. Has he made a decent signing since Gil Meche?
"It's all part of life's rich pageant, you know?" - Inspector Clouseau
by woodsmeister on Aug 25, 2009 2:37 PM EDT up reply actions
Grudzielanek could be the poster child for average. His 2007 and 2008 OPS+ was 100 both years.
"It's all part of life's rich pageant, you know?" - Inspector Clouseau
by woodsmeister on Aug 25, 2009 2:52 PM EDT up reply actions
I stand corrected, then.
"It's all part of life's rich pageant, you know?" - Inspector Clouseau
by woodsmeister on Aug 25, 2009 3:06 PM EDT up reply actions
This is sort of exactly my point. They need a fire sale yesterday to restock interesting young players onto the team and upper minors. The only problem is they’ve passed up a ton of opportunities and there are so few players in the organization that are even worth fire-sale-esque deals.
They should have/still should trade Greinke, but one of the points I’m trying to make is even hanging on to Greinke and trading all the Garkos and Broussards and Eduardos and Blakes of the world would still give them a much more promising outlook.
Steel Nick
In the past five games, coinciding with the beginning of his regular playing time, Andy Marte has a .950 OPS.
Just read in Castrovince’s latest that Wedge isn’t impressed by Marte’s latest efforts.
Andy Marte had a nice homestand, as he’s 6-for-his last-14 with five RBIs in four games. Wedge didn’t sound overly impressed with this. “He still needs to hit pitches he should hit,” Wedge said of Marte. “If you get a hanging breaking ball, you have to make sure you hit it. If you get a good fastball, don’t foul it off. Good pitches get young hitters out, so you’ve got to keep working to not miss mistakes.”
While I’m glad Wedge isn’t gushing about a 6-14 stretch, what purpose does it serve to say something like that?
Il faut d'abord durer.
I made the same point about his comments concerning LaPorta the other day. Basically, shut the hell up, Wedge.
Last night I said Wedge needs to be muzzled. I wasn’t kidding – someone at a higher pay grade needs to sit him down and tell him he’s not to talk about LaPorta or Marte again, or at the very least pretend he’s talking about Gimenez when he does. At least he’s putting them in the lineup.
The only point to these kind of public rips is if you think a guy is coasting, as if the player thinks he’s made it, and isn’t trying to improve. I’m sure that happens, and I could speculate about a couple of guys on our team that have fit that, but I can’t even imagine a scenario where that applies to Marte or Laporta right now.
by dgcambridge on Aug 25, 2009 11:29 AM EDT up reply actions
Thank goodness by now Andy has probably learned to ignore anything that blowhard says. At least he seems to have a friend in LaPorta now.
by supermarioelia on Aug 25, 2009 11:34 AM EDT up reply actions
Eric Wedge is having a nice second half, with the team again looking much better after falling out of contention. Shapiro didn’t sound overly impressed with this. “He still needs to win the $%^^ games that count,” Shapiro said of Wedge. “If you can’t stay in the race through June, it doesn’t matter what your record in August is. Good managers get wins out of talented players from Day 1.”
by Ryan on Aug 25, 2009 11:24 AM EDT up reply actions 29 recs
You are correct. Ryan took Wedge’s quote and parodied it.
"It's all part of life's rich pageant, you know?" - Inspector Clouseau
by woodsmeister on Aug 25, 2009 11:49 AM EDT up reply actions
Ryan with the uncharacteristic powersnark!
I guess this season has run your supply of dry humor … dry.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
He’s been hanging around here too much, apparently.
"Lotta heart in Cleveland." - Ian Hunter
by Denver Tribe Fan on Aug 25, 2009 1:42 PM EDT up reply actions
How about the one from the other day…
The more games we could give him down there, the more games he could get under his belt without the pressure of the big leagues, is something he needed," said Shapiro. "He may need it again, I don’t know." Wedge would seem to be an ideal fit for the position with manager open. "Not necessarily," said Shapiro. "It depends what we see toward the end of this season and what we do this winter. There’s always a chance we could go out and get somebody. We just have to work off Eric."
Yeah, that’s fun.
by JK in CBus on Aug 25, 2009 3:31 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
This is ripping Marte? Why isn’t this just saying, “He’s doing what he should do, he needs to keep it up”? Wedge always takes something simple and draws it out.
Steel Nick
This feels like the Peralta thing again. With certain players, he seems oddly compelled to downplay their successes and publicly call them out on their shortcomings.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
It’s certainly a possibility. The reason I asked the question is because I first read this quote from another source than Castrovince, and on its own it just sounded like more WedgeBot speak. It’s with Castrovince’s preceding interpretation that it’s colored a slam on Marte.
Steel Nick
Thus marking only the eighth time in the last four seasons that Andy Marte has started at least five games in a row (and half of those streaks came in 2006).
Hopefully a few hard hit balls last night will be the beginning of a bit of slugging from Andy.
by supermarioelia on Aug 25, 2009 11:41 AM EDT up reply actions
Why isn’t Peralta getting occasional starts at SS? Does this team want to purposely destroy all his trading value?
I think that they see this as our lineup going forward. This . We can quibble – I’d rather trade Jhonny, and pickup up a scrapheap slugging 1b – but’s it’s a minor point. Overall, I really like this lineup.
by dgcambridge on Aug 25, 2009 11:33 AM EDT up reply actions
Jhonny Peralta as a SS is ridiculously valuable. The team needs to make it look like Peralta was moved out because of a superior talent, not because he can’t field his position.
I think that management thought that the best thing for Jhonny was not to move him around, but instead to keep him in one position. Right now, that position is 3B.
"It's all part of life's rich pageant, you know?" - Inspector Clouseau
by woodsmeister on Aug 25, 2009 11:43 AM EDT up reply actions
The logic is…get your future SS experience now. Jhonny is a known commodity as SS. TEams won’t forget that he used to play there, and there is probably a view amongst the other GMs that he is below average there. We are now building Jhonny’s unknown assets like the ability to play 3B as well.
Are a few starts a week at SS going to change the perception that was developed over a number of years?
Yes, but I think it does look like that.
I also think that if other teams thought he was ridiculously valuable, and we were willing to trade him, then he’d be gone right now. One of those things wasn’t true.
by dgcambridge on Aug 25, 2009 11:44 AM EDT up reply actions
i don’t buy much into the “do token things to build trade value” concept. anyone that wants to acquire jhonny to play short is going to look at his years there, not “looky looky, he can still play short because he played 4 games there just this september!” that said, i would like to see some games where marte starts at third and jhonny at short, rather than the valbuena at short method from a couple days ago.
It might occur to people that he was moved because of his defense. Look at Carlos Guillen or Miguel Cabrera. Once they were moved, they never looked back and now their value is a shell of its former self.
The question is not whether Cabrera is a better shortstop than Peralta – he is. The question for any team who wants to acquire Peralta is whether the combination of Peralta’s adequate fielding at SS and position plus bat is better than what they currently have.
"It's all part of life's rich pageant, you know?" - Inspector Clouseau
by woodsmeister on Aug 25, 2009 11:46 AM EDT up reply actions
Miguel Cabrera’s value is pretty high. Have you looked at his numbers? Carlos Guillen is pretty much physically unable to play a difficult defensive position any more because of a succession of injuries. I don’t see these players as comps at all. For the right team, Peralta could still play shortstop. That team is no longer the Cleveland Indians.
"It's all part of life's rich pageant, you know?" - Inspector Clouseau
by woodsmeister on Aug 25, 2009 11:48 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Other teams know that Cabrera is a better defender. They’re also quite capable of figuring out for themselves whether Jhonny is an adequate defender at short based on all the time he’s put in there. There’s no shortage of stats or film. A few games at SS now aren’t going to change that.
He’s had an unfair reputation for a while that he isn’t a good defender. That’s why I used Cabrera or Guillen because teams might think it was a similar situation that got him moved.
I’m just saying playing him there once a week would be harmful to nobody. He’s a better defender than Valbuena at least.
So you’re saying you’d rather bench Valbuena and play Cabrera at 2B so that Jhonny can get some reps in at SS? Insanity, pure and simple. Valbuena has a greater future with this team than Jhonny. Sorry if you’re a fan of his, but I’ll put an avatar up for an entire season that Jhonny isn’t on the roster by the end of next July.
I just wanted to believe.
So you’d rather take two players away from their natural positions in order to put Jhonny back at SS despite his average numbers there? Do you not think that Cabrera is our best SS right now?
I just wanted to believe.
SS is Jhonny’s natural position as well. I’m just saying those starts Valbuena is getting at SS should be Jhonny’s.
Once again, it goes to the future. Jhonny’s future is no longer with this team. I say plant your future in their future positions and let ’em play.
I just wanted to believe.
And giving him a start a week at shortstop isn’t going to tell anyone who might want to trade for Jhonny anything they don’t already know.
"It's all part of life's rich pageant, you know?" - Inspector Clouseau
by woodsmeister on Aug 25, 2009 12:54 PM EDT up reply actions
The issue here is, what is Peralta, and when did the other GMs know it.
I believe that being a full-time 3B has helped Peralta’s trade value. Before, it was an open question how well he would play that position. I believe he’s played it very well, and my guess is that scouts are reporting that he looks better there now than he did a couple of months ago.
Now, he’s a solid third baseman who can also play shortstop if needed.
Before, he was a bad shortstop.
I don’t think playing him occasionally at shortstop helps or hurts his trade value, and I do think that playing in his new spot every day is helping him.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
I take issue with saying he was a bad shortstop though. He has basically improved every year he has been in the league. Last year, he was basically an average fielding shortstop and this year he has been above average at the position. On the other hand, Asdrubal was significantly below average last year when he played SS and has been slightly below average this year. The idea that there is some massive gap between the defense of Jhonny and Asdrubal is purely a myth.
If we’re tradng Jhonny as a 3b who can play SS, and not the other way around, we have effectively destroyed his trading value. As a SS, he is one of the best young players in baseball. As a 3B he is middling at best. I mean two years ago Rob Neyer had the guy ranked above Jake Peavy in his prime!
Look, if you’re going to come on here and talk about how Jhonny is as good or better defensively at SS than Asdrubal, don’t hint around about it, 10 comments after your first post. And now that you’ve said it, it seems like you’re waiting for someone to ask you for the reasons why you think this is true.
Here’s my suggestion: write a fanpost, and tell us why you think this is true. We shouldn’t have to draw your sources out of you. I, for one, think it’s crazy to think that Jhonny is as good as Asdrubal at shortstop. The results of the 2008 Tango survey (although AC was a 2b then) suggest that others think as I do. And I think the Indians might agree with me.
If Jhonny is a better defensive shortstop, or even as good, it changes the whole discussion here.
If you look just at UZR or UZR/150 for 2008 and 2009, you might conclude that Jhonny’s a better shortstop. The UZR difference in 2009 seems to come from a determination that Peralta has better range than Cabrera, which just seems incredibly unlikely. Defensive metrics are what they are, and 20 games in 2008 and 70 in 2009 doesn’t seem enough for Asdrubal to draw any sort of meaningful conclusions.
I think you’re a few years behind the times, Joe.
He has basically improved every year he has been in the league.
He sure didn’t improve from 2005 to 2006, his first two full seasons.
Last year, he was basically an average fielding shortstop and this year he has been above average at the position.
Say what you will, but the book on Peralta is that he’s a shortstop with weak range and a good arm. His trade value does not rest on your interpretation of his numbers.
If we’re tradng Jhonny as a 3b who can play SS, and not the other way around, we have effectively destroyed his trading value.
This is water under the bridge. Jhonny is viewed not only as a guy better suited to third base, but also as a guy who will be increasingly better suited to third base rather than shortstop as he enters his 30s.
As a SS, he is one of the best young players in baseball. As a 3B he is middling at best.
Actually, positional value difference is only about five runs as it turns out. If GMs feel that he eventually will play 3B better than shortstop — and I think they already believe that — then his value hasn’t really been affected in any significant way.
I mean two years ago Rob Neyer had the guy ranked above Jake Peavy in his prime!
That actually was 3.8 seasons ago, which is a lot more than “two years.” 2005 was a long time ago, my friend. Peralta is good, but he isn’t the guy we thought he was.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
You’re right in that I misspoke about the two years ago comment. It was actually less:
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/preview08/columns/story?columnist=neyer_rob&id=3310373
And here’s a link to some of us commenting about the article:
http://www.letsgotribe.com/2008/3/25/13814/1904#3239369
Not trying to play a game of gotcha with anyone but even as the Peralta lover that I am, I was utterly stunned that no one found that ranking by Rob Neyer particularly egregious (I thought it was a bit too high). Furthermore, this ranking was after his miserable 2006 and a bounce back in 2007 that was somewhere in between his 2005 and 2006 numbers. I think we all assumed after 2007 that this was the Peralta we were getting for the future. So that ranking was very much in light of the shift in perception on what kind of player Peralta would become.
Just take a look at that list. There’s a lot of absolute superstars that a .770 OPS-ing Peralta was ranked above. I just don’t want the team to throw a star by the wayside because of some subjective reports of his defense. The numbers indicate he isn’t as bad as his reputation would have you think. The team has to make sure it maximizes the return it gets for a player of this caliber.
I like Peralta a lot. For awhile, I called myself the Peralta apologist on this site, saying his defense was underrated. However, this one list is virtually meaningless to me, and should not be what we base our expectations for a trade on.
The point also remains that Jhonny is what he is at SS, the league’s opinion will not be swayed even if we were to play him there every day the rest of the season. There are smart people running these teams and they have enough information to determine how they view Peralta defensively as a SS. I can also guarantee not one of them uses a Rob Neyer list when making the decision, they have better information.
Didn’t remember that piece. Part of Peralta’s hypothetical value at that point was the very real chance that he would return to his age-23 level, and perhaps even improve on it, over his age-26 to age-30 seasons. That hasn’t happened.
No doubt Neyer is discounting Peavy and all pitchers to some extent due to high attrition rates.
Neyer also is not considering contracts. Peralta’s contract is certainly not bad at this point, but it no longer adds much to his value. Based on his four-year deal two years ago … well, we’ve already cashed in the best two years of those four.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
Here’s a proposition: Trade Marte and keep Peralta. Andy’s DOB is October 21, 1983 and Jhonny’s is May 28, 1982. Andy is cheaper and under team control longer than Jhonny, but Peralta is clearly the superior player. You would get more in trade for JP than AM.
Funny how any time redundancies come up, Jhonny is the guy to get traded. His value has taken a hit this year, but the poor guy is undervalued, even by his own enlightened fans.
I don’t think I’m undervaluing Jhonny. I’m just not into spending $11 million on a decent player for the next two seasons.
No question that Jhonny has to be considered the better player at this moment and projected forward. But he won’t be part of the 2012 club, and all we need for 2010-2011 is a warm body at that spot. And we’ve got one.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
Another “poor Jhonny” post. I’ve had my fill of them. No one hates Jhonny. On the contrary, I think people on this site have a good handle on him. He’s a 3b with a 100 OPS+ bat, signed for OK money for the next two seasons.
We all recognize his value, but like Garko, his importance to this rebuilding team at his salary, at a replaceable position, just makes him a good player to move.
I would hardly qualify this as a Poor Jhonny post. If the Tribe is going to compete in 2011 he would be better than Marte, though at a significant cost.
But the Tribe is not going to compete in 2010, and the truth is that 2011 might be only a half-compete situation. The projected difference between the two, to help compete in 2011, is not worth paying Peralta for both 2010 and 2011. That’s the issue.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
Yeah, I follow this. But to me it also suggests that 2012 is the target year, not 2011. Punting on 2011 is a disturbing reality.
It isn’t punting on 2011 to say that it’s not worth paying Jhonny $11 million to have him there for that season. We have a lot of possibilities for that spot by 2011, including Marte, Hodges and Chisenhall. There’s an outside shot we put Santana there, e.g., if Marson is really kicking ass. There’s two years of potential trades and free agency.
Surely it’s conceivable we can win without Peralta, isn’t it? Well, then, it’s not punting.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
Also: Grady will be 29 in 2012. In addition to being three years out in the distance, 2012 has a lot of holes. If I squint I don’t see the Indians being great then, either.
Not sure what your point is about Grady, as 29 is dead in the middle of his prime. The more significant fact is that 2012 is his walk-year, unless we can extend him beforehand.
I can’t account for your squinting. As far as anyone can tell, we are in great shape with position players for 2009, 2010, 2011 and 2012, if not beyond. Quite a few great young players on the club, and quite a few VERY impressive prospects. The seasons 2011-2014 rest on how well the pitching comes together.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
I thought 27 was the prime year. I don’t see how 29 can be dead in the middle of prime. In 2012, Choo, Sizemore and Peralta will be 30. Marte will be 28 at the end of the 2012 season. Not a young team, and not a team with its core players in their prime. The young players on the club —Valbuena, Cabrera, LaPorta—look good, but once again there’s the need for a longterm payoff from Santana, et al.
It’s a steep climb to the peak at 27 — which is actually 27/28 — and then a long, slow decline through 34/35. Average production at 29 is not much less than at 27, and the peak is significantly longer for highly productive and/or athletic players. It is not reasonable to expect an All-Star, Gold Glove center fielder to be “in decline” at age 29.
Grady’s top comps through 25 are, in order: Barry Bonds, Jack Clark, Duke Snider, Johnny Callison, Bobby Bonds, Gus Bell, Harold Baines, Carlos Beltrán, Andre Dawson, and Del Ennis. In their age-29 seasons, eight of those ten had an OPS+ at or above their career OPS+, and several had career years at 29. The other two — Bell and Baines — had down years at 29 but bounced back for great age-30 seasons.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
Peralta will not be on the team in 2012. Choo and Sizemore will be in their primes at age 30. Valbuena and Cabrera will be in their primes at age 26, and LaPorta at age 28. For an All-Star, prime generally is 24/25 to 33/34, so 29/30 is very much in the middle even if 27/28 is the peak.
You are managing to be pessimistic about a situation that actually is ideal.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
You are managing to be pessimistic about a situation that actually is ideal.
Well, hell, then: Why worry?
Grady won’t be compared with Duke or Jack next year. Here are Grady’s OPS+ between age 22 and 26: 123-132-127-128-100 (610). Snider’s: 123-140-118-136-166 (683). Clark: 152-130-153-128-139 (702).
Not that that’s how they do similarity scores, but okay.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
Stop that right now! We played this game last year. (and it sucked then too!!) Other teams are going to the playoffs and our last game will be #162
No freakin’ kidding!
"Lotta heart in Cleveland." - Ian Hunter
by Denver Tribe Fan on Aug 25, 2009 1:44 PM EDT up reply actions
Even a terrible team will win 62 games a year. Don’t get me wrong, I love to see the Indians win every time and I really buy into them every spring. But just like last year, this team had to evolve into something worth watching after we’d been lappped by teams that aren’t that much better.
To continue the Jhonny, 3B/SS topic, what is the general consensus about Valbuena’s defense at second? I’ve read it’s mediocre and I’ve read it’s good. Are we happy with it, or not?
Just curious: Given the financial moves made this year, would the Tribe really pay to bring Shoppach back when they have cheaper options, especially since, in theory, it’s a placeholder year for the catcher (until Santana arrives)?
I just wonder how much that plays a part in all this.
-Kyle
Yes, I don’t really understand how Shoppach will be back (*assuming he is worth 3 million in arb) given that Shapiro has went on record as saying Santana could be ready as soon as summer of 2010.
I understand that Shoppach would likely hit 100 points better than a Marson/Toregas combo .. but is that really worth 2+ million dollars? Especially for one that could be eased out by this time next year?
That’s what I thought, too. It’s similar to why I think Jhonny will get dealt. It’s going to cost them nearly $12 million to keep him through 2011, and then he’s a free agent. It doesn’t seem to make financial sense to keep anyone who’s only going to be around for that first year of the “new era.” At least Grady’s option will keep him through 2012, so that’s two seasons of the projected competitive team.
-Kyle
I think the Indians still view Jhonny as a core player (on par with Grady and Carmona). At least going into next season. If you take the management on their word, if they still believe they have an outside chance to contend, then they have a much better shot with Peralta on it.
Now, that could change based on player performances next year. Some key guys could fail and they could use Peralta to plug those holes at mid-season. But I can’t see the Indians getting bowled over this winter to force a trade or them needing to save 4 million dollars (Jhonny 2010 price tag) so badly.
That $4 Mil 2010 price tag for Jhonny might be one of his best sales points. Just like with Lee, his value is partly wrapped up in the team friendly contract. I hardly think the team thinks of him as a core player going forward – especially not in the terms of a Grady or Cabrera. I’d take issue with the thought that Carmona is a core player at this point. That doesn’t mean they won’t hold on to him and work on turning him into that pitcher we thought he’d be 1.5 years ago, but holding onto a player is a giant leap from core.
I just wanted to believe.
Why not keep a guy around for a year of the new era? Especially if he’s an exceptional player (which is uncertain at present).
Well, I got the impression that they wanted to have some kind of stability in said new era — they wanted to put together a team that could compete every year. So losing your third baseman right after the first year of that new era would seem counter productive.
And, as mjmarble mentioned, his contract would probably make it easier to move him, and that money could then go towards other things.
I wonder, if Marte keeps hitting, if we’ll see him begin to get a few starts at third towards the end of September.
-Kyle
I doubt it. We already know that Marte is an above-average third baseman. We need to develop him into an above-average first baseman as well.
"It's all part of life's rich pageant, you know?" - Inspector Clouseau
by woodsmeister on Aug 26, 2009 8:28 AM EDT up reply actions
Cabrera SS Carroll RF Choo CF Peralta 3b HafnerDH Valbuena 2B Shoppach C LaPorta lf, Marte 1b, masterson P
8 minutes ago from TwitterBerry
i double check the date every time…
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Let's Go Tribe!
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
Featured Stories
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recent FanShots
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- BIG Series: Padres and Giants set to battle for control of NL West
- The Grandstand: Crunch time in September arrives again
- Hello, Bourjos: Angels rookie plays it fast on both sides of ball
- An off-the-wall take on why the Twins will make the World Series
- John Lindsey couldn't have come any closer to his first at-bat
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.
