In Defense of Lou Marson
by afh4 on May 19, 2010 12:10 PM EDT
in Analysis
Email
Print
Lou Marson is, undoubtedly, a terrible hitter right now. On what's shaping up to be a historically punchless Indians team, he owns the lowest OPS (.534) of any regular and the second lowest of any player that's appeared for the Indians (hello, Michael Brantley!). Just a few days ago, Tony Lastoria tweeted that it was time to bite the bullet and call Marson a backup for good. I found myself wondering, is that right? Is Marson really Josh Bard already? So, I went sniffing around.
First place I looked was the place any nerd would look: the numbers. There's nothing defensible about Marson's major league season so far. He's doing every single thing wrong, it appears. Realize that .534 OPS comes with a perfectly reasonable BAbip of .293. What if Lou had been particularly unlucky? Marson's approach has totally cratered from what pushed him through the minors and our handsome young catcher, he of the 361:249 K:BB ratio in the minor leagues (that's a 1.45, if you prefer) now has a 24:7 K:BB (3.43) in 2010. On top of the loss of plate discipline, he hasn't suddenly turned into a power hitter: he popped XBHs at the low, low rate of one per 13.5 ABs in his minor league career. This season, that number has climbed to 20.5.
So, I'm doing this and thinking, this kid is hopeless. He throws pretty well (35% CS) but that's about it. He doesn't appear to dip tobacco, so maybe he'd be good in some kind of anti-smokeless campaign but other than that and the fact that he's not Mike Redmond, I didn't have a lot to go on. And then, I let my eyes climb to the top of screen and, like I often do, I thought of Jay. And I felt like an idiot when I checked the line that matters most:
Born: June 26, 1986 in Scottsdale, Arizona
Let me just throw some bullet points at you:
- Lou Marson is two months younger than Carlos Santana.
- There are 21 catchers that have at least 90 PAs (admittedly cherry-picked) this season. Their average age as of today is 30.45.
- The oldest of these catchers is Gregg Zaun (39) closely followed by Jorge Posada and Ivan Rodriguez (both 38).
- The youngest of these catchers are Matt Wieters and Lou Marson, both still 23. Of those two, the younger is Lou Marson. Lou Marson is the youngest regular catcher in the majors.
- Since integration, only 58 catchers have ever debuted in their age 24 season or younger and had ">90 PAs of an OPS+ over 70. Granted, Marson's OPS+ is barely over 50 but it's still remarkable exactly how rare it is for a young catcher to debut and hit even a little bit.
248 comments
|
2 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Marson has shown some signs of life recently. Granted, this is splitting a SSS into an even smaller sample size, but over his last 54 PA, he has a far more respectable .733 OPS, with 4 XBH. Not great, but squarely in line with what Wieters did last season.
another tlastweet answering a question was that he thought when santana was ready, they’d dump santana and have marson be the backup – which is obviously way wrong for a number of reasons.
Has he ever gotten a roster move right? I mean, even once?
Though I look right at home, I still feel like an exile
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on May 19, 2010 12:53 PM EDT up reply actions
I am curious then how you feel about Michael Brantley since I think a lot of the reasons one would remain currently optimistic about Brantley would be similar to the reasons you use here for Marson. Positional difference is acknowledged, but Brantley’s biggest positives right now are age and minor league K:BB ratio.
A similar situation, sure. The worry is whether either can escape their current major league scouting report:
Will take a walk. Can not hit the ball over your outfielders. CHALLENGE.
Yea, I guess I am just looking at them purely as hitters and see a lot of similarities with Brantley getting the edge in speed. A lot less should be expected of Marson since he is a catcher, but ultimately I am concerned that neither will ever hit major league pitching.
The Chisenhall thing is kind of a false analogy. He wouldn’t hit not because of his age, but because he hasn’t played but three months in AA. If he had full AA and AAA seasons, I would expect him to exceed a .600 OPS in his first two months.
I feel bad for Lou mostly because he must have known he had a few months to establish himself before the monster arrived, and he hasn’t done it. Once you get stuck with the backup catcher title, it’s tough to shake it.
Though I look right at home, I still feel like an exile
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on May 19, 2010 12:51 PM EDT reply actions
Really? Oops.
Though I look right at home, I still feel like an exile
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on May 20, 2010 12:35 PM EDT up reply actions
Thank you. Great post. Everybody needs to remember that guys like Valbuena, Marson, and Brantley (and one C. Santana, perhaps) are going to have serious periods of adjustment to MLB pitching. Guys like the Don and Matola are older, so they should maybe not have the same grace period.
This is why I think there would be a market for Marson and we should capitalize on it when Santana is ready. We’re not so loaded at every position as we are at catcher, and we should balance it out when possible.
Except that Marson’s best/highest purpose probably is as a big-league backup, and we could use a cheap one of those as well as anyone else could.
No, I think there’s a difference here, even if it’s semantics. It’s one thing to declare a player a backup based on his record to this point. I think many have done that and Tony’s tweet was representative of that viewpoint.
It’s another to say that his most likely trajectory (or “best ML value”) is fringe starter/backup. I’m not denying that: that’s true of nearly every catching prospect. I’m just saying that these few months are essentially a giant piece of noise in the sample. There’s no developmental reason for him to be in the majors-the numbers bear that out. Taking a step back, if we had to guess what kind of catcher would be the youngest regular in the majors, does it make any sense, developmentally, for it to be a player with Marson’s minor league record? No. Not that I can see.
I just don’t get it. Not one little bit. Why?
Somebody sees potential starter in Marson. They won’t give us potential starter trade value, but it’s better to get another Lake County starter for Marson, use Torregas as depth, and sign a recurring case of the Redmonds as Santana’s backup.
If your starting catcher is young, your backup catcher should be Redmond, or someone like him. If your starting catcher is a vet, your backup should be someone like Marson. The backup/starter relationship should include a vet who knows the league.
In quickly pulling this together, the question I kept asking was: Why aren’t they just using Toregas? I really don’t think Marson should’ve been in the majors from the jump after really taking a second to look at it.
Toregas forces you to have 4 catchers on your 40-man…which is somewhat challenging. But maybe for half a season it isn’t, or shouldn’t have been, a bad option.
That and Marson is forced to Double-A to play everyday. Some may say that would not necessarily be a bad thing, but it also means you likely NEVER get a chance to see him play for an extended period of time at the big league level. These three months are it for Marson. It’s really his one time shot in Cleveland to prove his work and either increase or decrease his value, and all he has done so far is decrease his value because he isn’t going to get much of a chance to make right on his bad play since Santana will arrive anytime in the next 2-6 weeks, and likely for good.
If someone really sees a potential starter in Marson, then I guess we’ll trade him. Keep in mind, though, that we never got a satisfying offer for Shoppach — not even right after he hit 21 HR in 352 AB and was only going to make $2 million.
i’m starting to have hope for talbot. based on almost nothing.
by Brick. on Jan 12, 2010 9:49 PM EST actions
You wouldn’t call that attitude towards the Shoppach trade as satisfying?
Certainly an untested starter who’s out of options is not what we hoped to get for him a year earlier.
Yeah, I was joking. There’s really know way we could know Talbot would become probably our best starter through the first 1/4 of this season. And who knows, with his rates, how long that success will last.
At the moment though, I’m happier with Talbot than I would be with Shoppach, presumably even if Kelly was fully healthy.
The backup/starter relationship should include a vet who knows the league.
Why?
Come on, four billion!
Because there is no real reason not to. I know that answer isn’t replete with stats or factual assertions, but I’d love to here why one of the two catchers on the 25 shouldn’t be a vet.
I don’t think your second catcher should be your second best catcher. I think your second catcher should be complementary, based on what your primary catcher actually is.
Marson
Marson has been hugely disappointing this year. Talking with team officials, they felt he was very close to major league ready and would hold his own this year. To date, he has not done that in any facet of the game. His offense has been terrible, his defense almost just as bad, and his handling of the staff has been awful. I get a chance to talk to a lot of the pitchers on the staff, and while I am not gonna disclose private conversations, I’ll just say it is of no surprise they prefer to work with Redmond. He came to the indians as a reputed leader and excellent handler of pitchers, and it’s been a disaster actually and completely the opposite.
Now, I agree, he is just a month shy of his 24th b-day. So, no, you don’t completely give up on the guy. I’m as patient as they come. But in talking with some scouts recently, I have been sold that maybe he is what he is. I hope I am wrong, and in all honesty I have absolutely no problem with him becoming a backup because that’s what he would have been either way with Santana here. I think that what is happening though is he is cementing his status as a backup for Santana and there will be few questions on if he could start here as long as Santana is here. He’ll be a valuable second catcher like Shoppach was to Victor. I actually think he’ll have a solid career, and will be a very good backup or a fringe starter on a bad team.
Is this Mr. Lastoria himself?
1. Great work.
2. No subject lines.
by JulioBernazard on May 19, 2010 1:17 PM EDT up reply actions
At least you found the reply button. You’re ahead of a lotta folks.
by JulioBernazard on May 19, 2010 1:20 PM EDT up reply actions
I assume this is about Marson?
it’s been a disaster actually and completely the opposite
"I call myself common sense" —Manny Acta
I would have put a “/sarc” after that, but it would’ve been oxymoronic.
by JulioBernazard on May 19, 2010 1:43 PM EDT up reply actions
I hope it was obvious that I was facetiously “piling on.”
by JulioBernazard on May 19, 2010 6:19 PM EDT up reply actions
If the Indians thought he was major league ready, I think they were being foolish. His numbers at no level last year made that seem to be the case, This is a player with a career OPS of .721 in AAA. If the Indians thought he scouted as ready for the majors (and the Indians had all of 160 ABs of Marson within the organization to make that evaluation) then they were pretty clearly wrong.
Major league ready from a defensive standpoint and with handling pitchers. They would be fine with him offensively if he was doing what he was supposed to be doing on the defensive side of the ball and handling the staff. I’m not speaking for anyone here, but in talking to several people associated with the organization over the past three months since spring training started, I get the feeling there is a pretty big disappointment with him right now. When talking to Marson and seeing him last year in Columbus, I felt he had field general stuff and the scouting reports aligned with him being an excellent leader and handler of the staff and a solid defender, but so far since spring I have seen a guy way over his head defensively and who is lazy behind the plate and has had several instances where his pitchers have been upset with him. I think he still could be a starter some day, but from the vibe I’m getting it’s not looking likely as compared to what people were saying 9 months ago when we got him. Again, I am fine with him backing up, which is what he’ll do here with Santana anyway, and is for the most part why he was acquired, to lock up the catching spot for awhile.
I think the FO decided to punt on ANY offense from the catcher position in order to save the 40-man spot, assuming that Marson would be able to handle the defense and pitchers. Hasn’t worked out as planned, but I’d rather just say “who cares” about the record and at least get a look at Ambriz or whoever.
I get the feeling there is a pretty big disappointment with him right now.
Duh. The team has to be pretty disappointed with Marson, Valbuena, Sizemore, Masterson, Huff, Raffy Perez, LaPorta, Brantley, Joe Smith and Hector Ambriz. Did I miss anybody?
The failure of this team extends beyond Lou Marson. Making him the fall man seems downright petty. Lazy behind the plate?
My perception of the comments Tony is passing on are that they’re typical of how defense often gets evaluated both within and outside of baseball: when you don’t hit, all of the intangibles of your defense suck. When you do hit, no one talks about those things at all, unless you’re truly horrible.
I agree. Look at Marson’s passed balls in the minors. His 2010 is the aberration. The people making assessments or judgments of talent in the Indians organization—if that is who Mr. Lastoria is referencing and not those from other organizations—need to look in the mirror.
I don’t think he was catching quite the same ~90 MPH with movement stuff that he’s getting here.
"I call myself common sense" —Manny Acta
Yeah, there is disappointment with a lot of guys. The difference is all of them will get a bigger leash to prove themselves…..which is unfortunately not the case with Marson. ‘Tis why there was hope he’d show a lot more than he has. The disappointment is not in his offense really, it is almost squarely on the defense and all the intangibles. I think in time, if given the chance to go back to Triple-A and regroup, he could still become something more, but it obviously would have to be elsewhere.
but it obviously would have to be elsewhere.
Forgive me for stating that such thinking is foolish. Unless he has the personal charm of Milton Bradley along with the vanity of Gary Carter, why would you write him off? You see a few things you don’t like and you’re finished with him? If so, this is scouting at its worst.
In other words, he pretty much has to have the intangibles of Charlie Manson to be dumped so soon. If this is so, where was the due diligence of the team that traded for him?
I have never assumed that the Indians needed to be that high on Marson in order to include him in a six-man swap.
Sure, I agree with that. But to act surprised, all of a sudden, like How did this guy get here? is a little disingenuous. You traded for him! You told people he was major-league ready! You can’t simply pass it off on the Phillies, and say, Well that’s what they told us.
Again, who said the front office has given up on him? I think somewhere along the way something got misconstrued here.
You cited unnamed sources who viewed him as a disaster. If these weren’t front-office sources, then I have misunderstood.
I cited no one. I think you are completely misconstruing the posts from what I am saying as my opinion versus from someone else. I said he came to the team as an reputed leader and excellent handler of the staff, but he has been a disaster. The disaster comment is my opinion.
They would be fine with him offensively if he was doing what he was supposed to be doing on the defensive side of the ball and handling the staff. I’m not speaking for anyone here, but in talking to several people associated with the organization over the past three months since spring training started, I get the feeling there is a pretty big disappointment with him right now.
What does the phrase “I get the feeling” mean to you if it’s not clearly prefacing the next statement as the author’s opinion?
Come on, four billion!
That’s weaselly, in my opinion. “They would be fine…”—what does that suggest? On whose authority?
Tony drops references to unnamed scouts and pitchers who have made derogatory comments about Marson. He offers these as evidence, and then backtracks when questioned. When we started this illuminating colloquy, Tony didn’t say his unnamed sources were outside the organization. He only did so when asked about them.
I think Tony is just saying the chances of him ever catching in Cleveland are relatively low. Santana would have to crater or be in a helicopter accident, which maybe we should sort of expect.
Santana hasn’t played in the majors yet. No matter how good he looks, he isn’t a sure thing until he does.
This is absurd. Of course, there’s no sure thing. But let’s quit acting like there’s no correlation between minor and major league performance.
We’ll keep doing this. You’ll keep replying whenever someone seems too certain. And I’ll keep replying whenever you seem to be saying that we don’t know anything. Sorry everybody.
I don’t understand this. You’ve been plenty vocal on your side of the issue. Did you miss junkballer’s fanpost? People are tired of having to add qualifiers like “we don’t know anything for sure, but…”
I quite enjoyed junkballer’s clench-jawed optimism, actually, but that doesn’t relieve him or anybody else from the obligation to think clearly here. You know as well as I do that Santana has to play a few games before he can be anointed as the savior of the Cleveland Indians. Catchers are vulnerable, moreso than other position players. There will be plenty of time to write off Marson, but don’t count your chickens before they are hatched.
I don’t expect people to qualify every statement, of course. But a fallacy is still a fallacy.
What? He could still get hurt/collapse after major league success.
This is where we differ. I’m going to guess that you are violently opposed to this:
Minor league batting statistics will predict major league batting performance with essentially the same reliability as previous major league statistics.
I don’t mean quibbling with “essentially.” I get the sense that you think the two are very far apart. I think most people probably underrate the prediction value of minor league numbers, and overrate the value of major league numbers. It’s easy to do.
I’ve bought into the major-league-equivalent concept since the days of the Bill James Abstract. So, sure, I agree with that. It’s a valid tool. I was simply taking exception to Tony’s comment that if Marson is to be a starter it will have to be with another team.
And all I am saying, is it is very likely he will have to be a starter for another team. Nothing wrong with that one bit. Wow.
I’m having trouble making this fit with your statements above, and elsewhere. But this thread is stuffed; we’ll pick it up elsewhere.
by dgcambridge on May 20, 2010 11:31 AM EDT up reply actions
I think it is more or less a certainty that Santana will hit better than Marson already has in the majors.
More or less a certainty? That’s something of a contradiction, isn’t it? You don’t do anything with Marson until Santana is up with the Tribe for a while. All Santana needs is to take a foul ball off his hand.
Well, maybe because he’d have to contend with Santana? So, yes, if he regrouped and were to become something more than being a backup to Santana, he’d then have to “obviously do it elsewhere”.
This is a long-time logical fallacy in prospect evaluation: worrying about having too many good players when, currently, you have none.
I agree actually. You can n ever have enough talent at any position. The point though being that Marson has little chance to become more unless Santana bombs. Hence the very likely scenario where to be more than a backup, he’d have to play elsewhere.
I was at the Orioles game last Friday. Masterson was all over the plate (5 BB, 2 HB in 5.1 Inn) and I thought Marson exhibited pretty good reactions. I was under the impression that his defense had improved and I assumed it was because Alomar was working him.
If you believe it's just a game, you're also probably wondering why Santa keeps skipping your house every year.
by LeftyCatcher on May 19, 2010 3:04 PM EDT up reply actions
Bingo! Never fire a catcher.
If you believe it's just a game, you're also probably wondering why Santa keeps skipping your house every year.
by LeftyCatcher on May 19, 2010 3:43 PM EDT up reply actions
I think the Indians thought he had the maturity, defensive competence, and plate approach to make the cut at the big league level this season even if his numbers didn’t come out looking good. I’ve been most surprised by his defensive sloppiness, but I think he has pretty clearly failed on the first two fronts and those seem to be hurting his performance at the plate. From everything I’ve read, Marson’s “makeup” is viewed well, so I don’t see any reason not to view some projection into his development along these fronts. The more important question is what kind of projection actually fits with his bat and his extreme lack of power.
Marson has held his own throwing out runners. If we agree that Marte was not given an appropriate opportunity to determine his worth, why is it not premature to declare Marson worthless after 40 games? If scouts have already written him off, and we concur that he’s just a stiff, doesn’t that challenge the thinking that says the braintrust was too quick to write off Marte?
Fringe starter on a bad team? That’s what he is right now.
I agree, 40 games is way too quick to make snap judgements. People who know me understand that I am extremely patient to a fault. The problem with Marson is this is a different case entirely and not the typical situation where you let him get 600 PA before truly evaluating him. Fair or not, he is only going to get 200-300 PA before being evaluated, because after that he is the backup to Santana in Cleveland or stuffed in Triple-A at Columbus. And barring injury or a collapse by Santana, Marson will take 2-3 years to probably get those 600 PA in sporadic play and not playing every day like he is now. So, unfortunately, heavy weight will be put into his play now as a starter. Teams and scouts don’t need to see actual results, they need to see projection and development, and to date he has failed miserably in every category except throwing.
I agree Marson won’t get 600 plate appearances, but he’s had 168 plate appearances in the bigs with an OPS+ of 76. Doesn’t projection come in the form of his age 22 season in the Eastern League?
Well, first off, he is not 22 years old as he turns 24 in a month. Also, while there may be some analysis subjectively to correlate his current big league performance with what it may be if he were a 23 or 24 year old at AA or AAA, there also is a ton of objective analysis being done at the big league level on him and if development and any projection is being seen.
He was 22 when he smoked the EL.
And, to nitpick, no analysis the Indians are doing of him is “objective.”
oops, apologies, I read that wrong. In any case, yeah, there was surely projection two years ago when he was doing well at 22 in the EL. It’s why if I recall he was ranked as the Phillies 3rd or 4th best prospect going into last season. But that was two years ago, and as we know a lot of projections don’t always hold up. It’s what makes the minor leagues so fascinating to me.
The Indians’ reaction to Marson, as you describe it, seems surprisingly harsh. It’s as if they don’t think he’s coachable.
Let me be clear. Not saying they think he is not coachable at all. Saying there is disappointment in his play but that in no way has any “verdict” on him as a player been reached. If I call or email them on any player, they always typically give a reply with the caveat that nothing can truly be determined until more data is available. The stuff with the pitching staff comes from some pitchers I have talked to on the big league team that I simply can’t elaborate on.
Ya know what… Hammy’s been crapping all over Huff’s pitch selection and his “reluctancy” to work inside… I keep thinking Marson should be the one to tell Huff “hey, throw inside… the manager sees this as the problem and even the broadcaster knows about it”
"I call myself common sense" —Manny Acta
Maybe he did tell Huff that and that’s why Huff thinks he’s a pain in the ass.
by odradek on May 19, 2010 3:34 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Sounds like what you’re trying to say is, they expected that Marson would be more of a polished, finished product as a defensive catcher, including his communication and game-calling, and they’re disappointed that that hasn’t been the case so far. But that’s as far as it goes. Do I basically have it right?
Leading the witness, your honor. Here’s was TL said:
He came to the indians as a reputed leader and excellent handler of pitchers, and it’s been a disaster actually and completely the opposite.
At the age of 21 in High A ball, Marson OPS’d .780. At the age of 22 in Reading, he OPS’d .849. The much beloved Kelly Shoppach OPS’d .841 in Eastern League when he was a year older than Marson.
The people doing this analysis have decided on the basis of 92 plate appearances that Marson is a stiff? (His 72 PAs before 2010 weren’t bad.) Where were these scouts when Marson was selected as a player in the Cliff Lee trade? If this is the sort of thinking going on in the front office, things are worse than I realized.
The Indians have not made any decisions based off his short amount of plate appearances this year. They always have this thing of evaluating guys after a much larger date sample, and they are right. I think the problem here is the focus is too much on the offense, because the reason for the disappointment to date is that his defensive abilities have not translated so far as originally thought. It’s not what is hurting his stock as any baseball person understands a 23 year old rookie catcher is going to struggle at the dish while taking on all the other responsibilities that come with catching. I mean, look at Victor Martinez’s numbers in his half season in 2003 which were not good nor gave any hint at what kind of offensive player he will be. The same with Santana when he gets here, who likely will initially struggle. What we are seeing with Marson right now is EXACTLY why Santana is not here, in that they know he will hit and likely go through an adjustment period when he gets to the bigs, but that they want to ensure his other areas of the game are as good and developed as they possibly can be so it all doesn’t snowball on him at once like things have with Marson.
If that’s true, you have described a failure of management, not a failure of a player. Management is supposed to put a player into a position to succeed. If they overestimated his composure that’s their fault. To then assign blame to a player for not being able to handle responsibilities thrust upon him is a copout, to my thinking.
This would make all player failures into management failures. I guess you can make that into a consistent viewpoint, if you choose.
And again, where are the people who said Marson was the guy we wanted from Philly? Is nobody taking responsibility for this selection?
Marson was the fourth option in that trade. But, yes, we definitely wanted him. And the Phillies deemed him major league ready. So I guess that makes their management a failure too.
And maybe both teams were correct and what we have seen is simply the struggles of a young player
by APV on May 19, 2010 2:47 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
THIS.
Anything in life is possible, except for skiing through revolving doors.
by MooneysRebellion on May 19, 2010 3:14 PM EDT up reply actions
And I won’t give the front office a pass on this, as when we acquired him they said right away that he was acquired because he was major league ready. A guy they felt could catch at the big league level for most of the remainder of the 2009 season and most of the 2010 season while we awaited the arrival of Santana. So a short-term starting catching option was needed, and in no way was Wyatt Toregas viewed as that guy. Backup yes, starter no. Plus, Marson offered them a guy they could control for awhile who would be a solid backup when Santana gets here and they felt at the time Marson was highly valued elsewhere so if need be they could flip him if it came to that. That all said, I think they were wrong on Marson.
(a) Yes.
(b) Marson is not Marte. The issue with Marte was the lack of sustained opportunity relative to his caliber as a prospect. Marte was a consensus Top 3 propsect at one point with a long track record of advanced hitting in the minors. Marson is not that guy.
I know that Marson is not Marte. I was just trying to point out the logical fallacy that says his career as a major league starter is finished.
I mean, we need to be able to try and make our own projections and predictions at times to. Based on what we as amateurs currently know, is it fair to say that his career as a major league starter is finished? Absolutely not. Is it fair for some people to wonder and even doubt that he can turn into a major league starter? I think it’s perfectly legitimate and has been since the time of the trade.
Absolutely. I agree entirely. But please look at Lastoria’s tweet. That’s not what he’s saying in 140 characters or less.
I’ve seen about enough of Lou Marson as the starting catcher. It’s painful. He’s a solid backup, that’s it.
Man, people can’t just throw quich irrational tweets these days without that even being put through a microscope. If you notice at the time of the tweet, it was after Marson buthered that inning. heh.
It seems like he’s talking in the present tense here. Not saying that Marson will never be a starter, just that all he is right now is a solid backup.
Come on, four billion!
The guy was understandably frustrated with watching Marson struggle (to put it extraordinarily generously) and popped off a little bit. I’m inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt, especially when he didn’t say anything the tells me explicitly that I shouldn’t.
Come on, four billion!
He’s still got a pretty bright future.
So. . . because he’s young and terrible, but a lot of other catchers who played in the big leagues at his age were also terrible, he’s got a bright future? I don’t think that the plane of his swing is going to change as he gets older, and that appears to be his biggest and most fatal flaw as a hitter.
If you don't respect Aaron Laffey, I will fight you.
by Cap'n Snegiryov on May 19, 2010 1:53 PM EDT reply actions
Marson is young enough to still be reasonable as a catcher in AA. I’m going to reserve judgment until he gets to hit at an appropriate level as opposed to taking your “scout’s take”, if that’s alright.
I do appreciate you taking the devil’s advocate position here and trying to figure out whether a case can be made for the guy. However, I don’t really see any of the numbers or any other evidence working in his favor right now. At best, you can say that the near-universal impotence of catchers his age indicates he’s not a total lost cause, not yet. I can get behind that assertion I suppose.
If you don't respect Aaron Laffey, I will fight you.
by Cap'n Snegiryov on May 19, 2010 2:10 PM EDT up reply actions
What’s in his favor is his age, period. He’s not anywhere in the neighborhood of the sort of talent who should be a starting catcher in the majors at age 24-the neighborhood where Wieters and Santana reside. He’s being asked to do something that the most elite catching prospects struggle to do-look at Wieter’s last season. So why would we expect his numbers to be anything but totally unfavorable?
I fault the people who asked him to pull this trick, not the kid for not being Matt Wieters.
But here is the thing, if you stick him in Double-A for half a season and then in Triple-A the other half once Santana is promoted, what have you really learned? Sure he could have polished some things off, but his approach, defense, leadership, and way he handled a pitching staff were already deemed major league ready. Also, by not playing him at the big league level this year, when do you do it? Next year he would never get a chance at extended playing time, and it would be his last option year. If the Phillies and Indians deemed him big league ready or damn close to it, yet has struggled so much, I guess the question is if that means anything or not. It’s all up to interpretation with how anyone sees it through their eyes really or make the numbers work for them.
Saying they were “deemed major league ready” doesn’t mean they were major league ready. In fact, your take seems to be that the brass has done a total 180 on that assessment in 40 games. If that’s the case, I think it was a failure of assessment, not one of regression by Marson. He was deemed something he clearly wasn’t. That’s a screw-up.
You don’t have to learn anything from an age 24 catcher. You have to get him major league ready-the Indians didn’t do that here.
And the whole business of “this is his only chance!” is overblown. As if Santana is penciled in for 150 games a year for the next ten behind the bench. If Marson was in AAA mashing and Santana was up here mashing, play one of them at 1B or DH to get them ABs, make Marson a personal catcher, or just wait for the injury. The Indians don’t need to be panicky about finding at bats for a player a year from now. Like we’re just overflowing with bats.
Front office has not pulled a 180. I think the only thing I have mentioned in regard to the front office is “disappointment” in his play. Stuff I am hearing from the scouts from other teams and players on the team are where I am basing most of the stuff on him failing in all areas of the game.
And come on, once Santana is here he is going to get every opportunity to hold onto the job even if he struggles. Could he fail? Sure. But it is much more likely Santana succeeds than Marson. Which is why this was the one true opportunity for Marson to get extended time. He’ll never have the bat to play anywhere else, especially first base, so he has to hit and more importantly be a very good defensively, lead, and handle his staff exceptionally well to stick at catcher. If anyone is holding out hope that marson gets another extended shot in Cleveland down the road, you are holding out for something that likely never happens. I’d actually slam the org had they sent Marson to Double-A, a level he has already proven himself at. Completely pointless move, and just spinning wheels on the guy. Bottom line, he had to go to AAA or bigs, and with Santana in AAA, well, there you go.
If the FO is disappointed they have no one to blame but themselves. It was unreasonable to expect much more out of Marson than he has delivered. It’s ridiculous to pass this off as his one chance as if injuries, trades, position changes, and a whole host of possibilities don’t exist. He could very well go back to AAA when Santana arrives and not have significantly retarded his development. 23 year olds are not playing make or break seasons.
by Brad D on May 19, 2010 3:22 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
I still don’t see how his age is actually working in his favor. Alex White doesn’t all of a sudden become a better prospect if we take him from A+ ball, where he’s dominating, and throw him into AAA to watch him get his ass knocked off (disclaimer: this is just a hypo and is not meant to reflect my opinion of Alex White). To me, age is only relevant when the player is forcing his way up through a system at a quicker-than-expected pace, or is holding his own against more advanced players. Marson has done neither. The fact that the player is merely young for his level is not itself cause for celebration or optimism—not unless it’s accompanied by the talent to justify his rapid promotion.
If you don't respect Aaron Laffey, I will fight you.
by Cap'n Snegiryov on May 19, 2010 3:04 PM EDT up reply actions
Dude put up a .351 wOBA in AAA at age 21, and when he hit the majors he put up .340 wOBA. Asdrubal was special because he was essentially a league-average hitter as a 21 and 22 year-old middle infielder. He falls into the category I described above, I think—he more than held his own at advanced levels, and his talent, both at the plate and in the field, dictated his promotions. Not at all similar to Marson.
If you don't respect Aaron Laffey, I will fight you.
by Cap'n Snegiryov on May 19, 2010 3:15 PM EDT up reply actions
Doesn’t matter if Marson is as good a prospect or even exactly similar. The point is that a relatively talented player’s skills can be totally overshadowed by being rushed-like Asdrubal’s age 20 season. Marson has been rushed to the majors by 24; this phrase alone makes it clear he’s not a talent in Asdrubal’s zip code. However, like Cabrera was his first time in AAA, Marson is now: whatever talents he has are being totally overshadowed by the fact that this is not his proper developmental level.
How has Marson been rushed? He’s been pretty much age appropriate at every level. His 22-year old AA season is almost to a tee what a good prospect should be at that level age-wise, especially a kid signed out of high school. Chisenhall is 21 there this year, Mills was 22 there last year, Weglarz 21 there last year, etc.
Catchers do not move as fast as other prospects and, besides, no reasonable human being can look at Marson’s AAA game totals and numbers and think “This guy is ready!” A prospect of his ilk clearly needs to play more than 90 games at AAA.
He was rushed to the majors because of Santana’s clock. Maybe it was the right move organizationally but it’s stupid for Marson’s development. Break a few eggs, though.
If Lou Marson was starting for Columbus, he’d be the third-youngest catcher in the International League.
This is why I am currently not worried about him. He’s young (and playing a demanding position), we’re dealing with a small sample size, people in Cleveland are pining to have received something of value from the Lee trade, and there is major pressure behind him (Santana). Give the kid some time. He’ll figure it out.
Anything in life is possible, except for skiing through revolving doors.
by MooneysRebellion on May 19, 2010 3:55 PM EDT up reply actions
See, I generally am not one to give up on a prospect and I definitely haven’t, but I just don’t see Marson as a guy that will be anything offensively, which is fine as a catcher, but he could be extremely replaceable his entire career. I hope he turns into what they expect defensively.
Very true. He may never hit at all. But isn’t that what we generally expect out of a backup/depth catcher? As long as he can get his stuff together defensively, I frankly don’t care if he never hits above .220 at league minimum salary. Especially as long as we have at least one decent catcher (Santana).
Anything in life is possible, except for skiing through revolving doors.
by MooneysRebellion on May 19, 2010 4:01 PM EDT up reply actions
If we’re going to make judgments about Marson after 27 games, may as well make judgments about Donald after one. Bingo, something of value.
But that’s exactly my point. Why the hell do we even care what Marson has done at this point (27 games)? Just let him play. Its not like we were resting our entire chances of success with him as our catcher. This really should be a non issue until perhaps middle of next year. If he still sucks then…well, then we can complain.
Anything in life is possible, except for skiing through revolving doors.
by MooneysRebellion on May 19, 2010 4:10 PM EDT up reply actions
I thought I was agreeing with you, but maybe I wasn’t clear. I’m not drawing any conclusions about Marson. It’s too early for that, in my opinion.
And yeah, that goes for defense, too.
Sorry about that, I misunderstood. I had read your post as a disagreement.
Anything in life is possible, except for skiing through revolving doors.
by MooneysRebellion on May 19, 2010 4:15 PM EDT up reply actions
OK, I agree that Marson might simply be overmatched because of his age and inexperience. Like I said, I haven’t given up on the guy completely. But there has to be something other than his age working in his favor to justify any optimism—in other words, there has to be some evidence that he does have talent being “overshadowed.” Why should I think that he’s really a player with a “bright future” and not simply a career backup? The odds are against him to begin with—it’s tough to find players who can hit and play defense well enough to start at catcher in the big leagues, as is evidenced by the fact that ancient guys like Redmond and Zaun are still around. And if you look at his lines from the minors, most of his production came from walks and good batting averages supported by high BABIPs. Those walks have already dropped off as pitchers just aren’t afraid of the guy.
If you don't respect Aaron Laffey, I will fight you.
by Cap'n Snegiryov on May 19, 2010 3:39 PM EDT up reply actions
I mean, even if he IS a career backup, that’s a pretty damned good outcome for him as a player. However, as you point out we’re judging him as part of the return on Lee, and so far that return looks horrendous. Go, Jason Donald!
If you don't respect Aaron Laffey, I will fight you.
by Cap'n Snegiryov on May 19, 2010 4:02 PM EDT up reply actions
“so far” ? Why do we need to evaluate it that way? It’s like f’ng fangraphs of a game. Who cares what the percentage of an outcome is? If that’s how we enjoy baseball we’d miss the unlikely – the great wins, the gut-wrenching losses, the 15th round non-prospect turned all-star, etc.
Well, I’m not going to reserve judgment on a trade until 10 years down the road. Obviously we don’t know all the outcomes for the players involved, but we can still form an opinion based on what we do know. My personal opinion is that Shapiro shouldn’t have traded Lee unless he felt that he was getting the other team’s absolute best prospect in return. I guess he may have felt that way about the return from Philly, but I’m pretty skeptical since Drabek and Brown were both left off the table.
If you don't respect Aaron Laffey, I will fight you.
by Cap'n Snegiryov on May 19, 2010 7:50 PM EDT up reply actions
We don’t know anything yet. Not even that Drabek and Brown were their best prospects. We don’t know about Marson, Donald, Carrasco, or Knapp either. I won’t wait ten yearsto judge either , but my opinion will evolve from not knowing to increasing knowledge each year. 2-3 years seems like the minimum, though.
Shapiro shouldn’t have traded Lee unless he felt that he was getting the other team’s absolute best prospect in return
And you’d have gotten fired, just like Toronto’s GM did.
Real leaders know when to pull the trigger.
Wait, you’re saying Shapiro would have gotten fired? That’s laughable.
If you don't respect Aaron Laffey, I will fight you.
by Cap'n Snegiryov on May 20, 2010 3:57 AM EDT up reply actions
Yes, if he made decisions based on machismo and burying his head in the sand, as you suggested, he’d have been fired a long time ago.
based on machismo and burying his head in the sand
Where are you getting this from? Geez. I just think that if you can’t get what you want at the trade deadline, and you still have the player under another year of control, you can afford to wait until the season’s end and watch the market for his services expand. Hell, the return the Phillies got for Lee during this offseason wasn’t much better, from an outsider’s perspective, than what we got for him at the trade deadline.
If you don't respect Aaron Laffey, I will fight you.
by Cap'n Snegiryov on May 20, 2010 11:27 AM EDT up reply actions
What the Phillies got, in fact, was widely viewed as worse.
The second half of the season is simply more high-leverage than the first. Lee’s value goes down significantly if you hold him out of the 2009 pennant race, and the risk increases significantly. How quickly we forget that he missed April 2010 with an injury, to say nothing of 2007.
What I object to is what I quoteboxed above. You are setting an arbitrary standard that has nothing to do with the real criteria that should be used to make the decision. One may or may not be getting a team’s best prospect.
The real decision is whether one is getting the 29 teams’ best offer specific to our needs, and only then, whether accepting that offer represents a better strategic option than holding onto Lee — which means accepting that his value drops. “Absolute best prospect” is a trifling way to think about it.
Dude, I’m not pretending that “absolute best prospect” is the standard for all deadline trades or anything. I just think that’s the price tag we should have put on Lee himself, who still had considerable value to the Indians. I think trading a player like Lee for prospects based on current need is unwise because it’s so hard to anticipate what your roster is going to look like just a few months down the road. Case in point, the completely unexpected and rapid decline of Sizemore—Philly had two outstanding young outfield prospects we might have been able to grab if not for the fact that they didn’t fill an immediately obvious hole in the system. Needs change all the time, and if you emphasize need over talent in your trades you will probably sell yourself short. If Shapiro thought he was getting Philly’s best talent in that deal, then I agree he should have pulled the trigger. I just don’t see how that could have been the case.
If you don't respect Aaron Laffey, I will fight you.
by Cap'n Snegiryov on May 20, 2010 12:27 PM EDT up reply actions
First, I think they do prioritize talent over need. I think they always feel they could use more up-the-middle players, and that they are inherently more valuable, so the two factors overlap more it may seem at first glance.
Did they think this was the best talent Philly had? Probably not. Did they think this was the most valuable collection of talent they could get from any team? Obviously they did.
The second question is whether you downgrade Lee’s projected trade value by not trading him immediately, given this particular best-available-return, and that is open to debate.
I don’t think the return for Lee looks horrendous. I think we’re going to end up with a couple of starters out of that deal, even if Knapp never does anything.
I agree. I think the trade is better than most think. not great by any means, but not the yard sale pickup it is made out to be. I think ultimately we have a good chance of getting an everyday infielder, middle of the rotation starter, and backup catcher out of it, all guys we control for the next 6 – 7 years. and this doesn’t even factor in the wildcard in the deal knapp.
In the vein of cherry picking data…
Marson got off to a horrible start to the season, getting just 3 singles in his first 38 PAs. Since then, he has hit .292/.358/.375 across 58 PAs. The latter line, admittedly a biased sample, is pretty much in line with pre-season projections for Marson. His blocking ability around the plate and his tendency to do seemingly dumb things is the more troubling issue for me at this point.
by APV on May 19, 2010 2:00 PM EDT reply actions 2 recs
why do we have to KNOW right now what he is?
he’s a young rookie that’s struggling. this was a couple month free look and nothing else. everything is going according to plan. he was always getting sent down for santana to come up. now he just has all this stuff he knows he needs to work on at the appropriate level.
This whole thread is hilarious. We have people in here who are quick to praise every Tribe AAA prospect as The Next Big Thing prepared to write off Lou Marson after 27 games. I see a kid who’s struggling both at the plate and behind it.
by FredOx on May 19, 2010 3:00 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
[cough] Andy Marte [cough]
"The delusional get what they deserve." - afh4
by woodsmeister on May 19, 2010 3:05 PM EDT up reply actions
Don’t go away. We value diversity here.
by ken from alexandria on May 19, 2010 3:24 PM EDT up reply actions
As long as you agree with us
If you believe it's just a game, you're also probably wondering why Santa keeps skipping your house every year.
by LeftyCatcher on May 19, 2010 3:26 PM EDT up reply actions
Yes, also. Marson is getting some valuable time in (to him, if not yet to the Tribe) right now and that’s good. In June, when Carlos makes his first appearance in Cleveland, Marson will either be starting in Columbus or he’ll be traded for a good pitching prospect. Either way he’ll be all the more valuable to us for having had this time in the majors.
Tony! While we’ve got your attention, what are the odds Jake Westbrook is an indian in 2011?
"I call myself common sense" —Manny Acta
I still don’t get how anybody can feel different about Marson now than they did at the time of the trade.
Dead horse.
I’ll just say the plate appearances are what they are, just a small handful and not nearly enough to properly evaluate him. Same goes for Brantley, LaPorta, Donald, etc. But, where proper evaluation can be made is how he has handled his pitching staff, shown leadership, and performed defensively because he has been doing that for three months now since the start of spring training. While the hitting stats are not very much considered from the spring, the intangibles are VERY much evaluated. So there are a good three months of work BEHIND the plate, not at it, to go on right now. Spring training games or not, you can definitely take a lot from the performances in spring combined with the performance so far this season behind the plate. While the coaching staff and front office need to keep an open mind and let time show otherwise, this is not at all how it works in the scouting world. Most times scouts only see a guy play a handful of games as there are in for a 3-5 game series and then write their evaluations just on that alone. It’s the difference between objective and subjective analysis.
Marson
Yes it’s true, he is still young and even younger than Santana. So my question is: If Marson is not too young to play in the majors and struggle, why is that Santana isn’t ready? One of the best Tribe backstops is our 1st base coach and I’m sure he would be willing to work with Santana on his defense. Marson may fool me and turn into a solid MLB catcher but he ssems to me like a younger version of Jason Kendall to me. How many championships does Kendall have? …just sayin’
Look at his beard though. The man is ten parts grit and hustle to every one part talent, and that’s what wins championships.
Come on, four billion!
He had Adam Miller’s middle finger sewed onto his own hand just to have more spots for his rings.
by YoDaddyWags on May 20, 2010 9:47 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
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
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Giancarlo Stanton busts Marlins Park scoreboard with tape-measure grand slam (VIDEO)
- Baltimore’s tradition of fans shouting ‘O!’ during national anthem sparks interleague feud
- Chris Perez follows rant against Cleveland fans with even better rant against Cleveland fans
- Pitcher Clayton Richard gets key pinch single in 13th after coming in 0 for 16
- Livan Hernandez welcomes ball boy to the bigs with shower of sunflower seeds (VIDEO)
