I believe in Santana
by APV on Jan 7, 2011 11:09 AM EST
in Analysis
Email
PrintFollowing up on my posts about LaPorta, Brantley, Masterson and Carrasco, I'm going to conclude the series with a short post on Carlos Santana. After being stolen from the Dodgers for Casey Blake, Santana has done nothing but hit in the Indians organization. Santana's 2008 breakout season split between Cleveland and LA was only reinforced by outstanding 2009 and 2010 minor league campaigns. When Santana finally got the call to Cleveland last year, he was a hitter who profiled as a high average, very high on-base percentage, high slugging percentage kind of guy...at catcher. This is what he did....
Santana showed outstanding plate discipline and on-base skills during his 192 Cleveland plate appearances. He finished with 8 more walks (37) than strikeouts (29), giving him a phenomenal 19.3% BB-rate. This helped him put up an excellent .401 OBP. His batting average, .260, was not exceptional, but here he was hurt by a somewhat low BABIP of .277. Since 2008, his BABIP has ranged from .304-.408 (good for a .362 average). Adjust his line in Cleveland northwards by about 30-40 points and both his average and OBP began to look pretty great. If one wants to quibble, they could say that his power, while still quite good (.207 ISO), underwhelmed. Projected across a full season, Santana was on pace for 21 HRs and 46 2Bs, though, pretty nice numbers for a rookie. Pitchers facing off against Santana actively avoided throwing him fastballs, as fewer than half the pitches he saw were heaters (48.0%). This did not help the pitchers much, as Santana had positive run values on all of the types of pitches he faced except the ~170 changeups he saw (wCH/C -0.03). If one really wants to be pessimistic, you could point out that Santana was in a slump the final month, and especially two weeks, prior to his injury on August 2nd. But I am not a pessimist when it comes to Santana (see title).
My only real concern about Santana is what happens to him while he is squatting behind the plate, not standing next to it. This concern, perhaps surprisingly, has nothing to do with stolen bases, as Santana caught more than 35% of the baserunners against him. Instead it has to do with who and what Santana lets pass the plate. Santana's 4 passed balls in 40 games put him on pace to put up a league-leading total across a full season. This is hardly a major concern, but it would be nice to see some improvement in how he handles major league pitches. The bigger issue is what ended his season, to which I can just say:
LET THE RUNNER SCORE!!!
If the Indians are in a situation where the one or two runs saved by a Santana block of the plate are more valuable than Santana's health, a vast number of things have gone right in the Indians universe. Quite simply, Santana should never put himself in the position of being hit while behind the plate. I know this is baseball blasphemy, but Santana's value as a hitter far exceeds the very marginal defensive value of blocking the plate. Let it go. Let the runner advance to go and let us collect your hits.
Below the fold is the posture I would prefer Santana take when baserunners are heading towards a close play at the plate:
Positive Indicators for Carlos Santana
- Games played (>95% of possible games)
- Increase in power (ISO ~250)
- Decrease in passed balls (on pace for 10 or fewer)
73 comments
|
4 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Yeah, they schedule 81 road games every year.
by InfiniteMonkeyTypists on Jan 7, 2011 2:23 PM EST up reply actions 4 recs
Okay, it really is time to knock it off with the subject line.
As to your point, you apparently have no idea how the MLB free agent system works. Santana is under club control for at least the next six seasons, and if past patterns hold, they likely will sign him to a contract that locks him up at least through 2017 or 2018.
For comparison, Grady made his debut in 2004 and won’t be going anywhere until 2012 at the earliest. That’s eight seasons after his debut, not three.
by Jay on Jan 7, 2011 9:37 PM EST up reply actions
Agree with everything you said, except the subject line. For big threads, you can click on a subject line, and it minimizes the comment, which is nice. For comments with no subject, you can’t do that.
"I think so, Brain, but how are we going to get the bacon flavoring into the pencils?"
How often are you going to come across essay-length comments, though (well, except for one recurring poster)? Usually comments are 3-4 paragraphs long at most. Using ‘z’ and/or Page Down is a easy way to navigate through a particularly long thread. We decided early on that eschewing the subject line gave the comment threads a more conversational feel, not to mention the aesthetic benefits.
We need Reddit-style voting for these types of comments so they get buried and we don’t have to waste time reading them.
Completely agree with Andrew’s point about the number of things that need to go right before that run is more valuable than Santana’s health. I really hope that someday we get to see Santana block the plate in such a situation in an Indians uniform, but I wouldn’t bet on it happening in 2011.
Il faut d'abord durer.
I’d love to see a study of how effective plate-blocking is as a strategy anyway.
A lot of times, you block the plate and it makes no difference. You get the out but you would have gotten it anyway, or the run scores.
So we’re not even talking about the value of a run, just the value of blocking the plate.
by Jay on Jan 8, 2011 1:14 PM EST up reply actions
What are the alternatives? Guys get their knees wrecked at second base waiting for a throw or turning a pivot. You can’t start bailing out. But where the hell else is the catcher supposed to be? In front of home, so he can lunge backward with the tag? Behind the plate, so he can run toward the runner with the ball? I’d say most collisions at the plate occur because it is where the catcher needs to be to catch the ball to have any hope of tagging out a runner at home.
You could argue that even throwing home is silly. It allows trailing runners to advance. It rarely is effective. But when a team throws out a runner at the plate it has tremendous psychological value.
Santana is not a born catcher. He positions himself poorly. Forcing him into this position to increase positional value may look good on a Power Point presentation, but he looks vulnerable on the field.
Of course turning a RUN into an OUT is not just a psychological benefit.
I would never say we should stop trying to make plays at the plate. But blocking the plate is intended to produce an out where the ball is going to arrive less than one second too late to make the tag — the runner would have been safe, but the catcher physically blocked him from touching the plate just long enough to catch the ball and apply the tag. I think we can and should train our catchers not to try to make that play, because how often does it really work out that way, anyway, as a percentage of how often it’s attempted?
We’re not talking about standing at/near the plate, we’re talking about BLOCKING the plate with your left leg. If you stand at the plate ready to take the throw, the guy is going to slide and score relatively cleanly, with very little risk of injury. The injuries come from the full-body blocking, I’m pretty sure.
It’s a stupid play.
by Jay on Jan 8, 2011 7:00 PM EST up reply actions
Incidentally, moving Santana to catcher isn’t just about positional value. It’s also about his ability to be a standout defensive catcher, and his intelligence and potential for leadership on the field. Think about how strongly we all felt about Victor. Now imagine if he’d been really good at controlling the running game. I don’t think that kind of a player looks good merely in a PowerPoint presentation.
by Jay on Jan 8, 2011 7:02 PM EST up reply actions
Hard to impact the game when you’re on the DL, and I expect Santana – Santana the catcher that is – to spend a lot of time on the DL through the course of his (Indians) career.
Our best players wear suits.
Victor averaged 137 games per season in his six-year tenure with the Indians, and he played in 140+ games in five different seasons. So it isn’t necessarily going to be a bad problem, but of course it might be.
by Jay on Jan 8, 2011 7:31 PM EST up reply actions
Has Acta said anything about the backup catcher situation? I know they signed Paul Phillips, but considering Santana’s knee and Hafner’s shoulder, I think I would rather see Marson as a super-backup, getting 50-60 games behind the plate while Santana DHs, especially when we play a lefty.
I would rather see Santana play first or third and let Marson play 100+ games at catcher. Maybe Santana can catch 20-30 games a year.
Based on the way he positioned himself on the play that ended his season, he is (a) not good at blocking the plate, and (b) due to get injured again.
Catchers are trained to block the plate. To ask them to do otherwise is probably not going to work, or just create another problem.
Yeah, I’ve made a point before that the strategy of developing plus offensive prospect talent at prime defensive positions to maximize their value has its limits, particularly at catcher. It’s the one position where potential offensive contributions can be really compromised, whether thru day to day wear and tear, or sudden injuries like we saw with Santana blocking the plate.
From his first day as a major leaguer, when he was immediately placed at the heart of the order, it was clear that Santana was, and would be for some time to come, the best bat in the lineup. I have no idea how his career will pan out, but I’ll bet that whatever numbers he puts up would be better if he wasn’t catching full time. Catching accelerates the athletic aging process. See Martinez, Victor.
I know Santana had already been converted from 3B before we got him, and that he’s a good catcher already, but with the reruns of Kalish barreling into his knee playing in my head, and wondering how we are going to maximize our fairly limited offensive capabilities over the next few years, I keep penciling Carlos in at 1B and DH as much as possible in my imaginary future lineup cards.
And for some reason, ghosts of Garko in the OF aside, I sometimes pencil him in at LF for some reason, just because it seems to solve a lot of issues, on paper.
It’s the one position where potential offensive contributions can be really compromised, whether thru day to day wear and tear, or sudden injuries like we saw with Santana blocking the plate.
In 2010 the top catchers in all of baseball ended up with around 550 plate appearances, while the top first baseman, for example, had plate appearance totals around 700. So in addition to your point about reducing wear and tear on the players career, we see that as an almost rule, the playing time for the catcher is already being limited across the league (usually given one if not two days off in a week). Since Santana’s hitting will almost certainly be better overall than say our current first baseman and our third baseman, hell even our DH. To optimize him we should be looking to get him I’d say at least a quarter of his playing time (assuming we can get him around 650 – 700 PA, and of course this assumes no injuries and no residue effects from his last injury) at either DH or 1B, hell maybe 3B. Lou Marson developing into a good back-up would be a pretty valuable part of the whole plan as well.
I have never heard of Paul Phillips before in my life. not once
by Gradyforpresident on Jan 10, 2011 9:44 PM EST up reply actions
So agree. If there has to be an unwritten rule, I wish it were re-written thus:
Catcher shall always give baserunner access to the plate. In return, runner shall not bowl over catcher. If runner does, violated team has full right to go after other team’s best position player…running him over, throwing at him, until the tit-for-tat is tatted. Those collisions are just petrifying to witness. Hasn’t the Tribe lost enough catchers in our lifetime?
by Bogalusa Bomber on Jan 8, 2011 12:43 AM EST reply actions
At one time the pitcher was the designated enforcer, since not all offenders played a position which would allow the offended team an opportunity to retaliate, I’m all for Carmona sticking one in Kalish’s ear the next time he comes to the plate..
Our best players wear suits.
In general, I would agree. Santana did however show a certain ineptitude at dealing with the approaching runner, not just on this play but on others. Did you see the one play that SportsCenter was replaying all night, where he just got totally upended by a runner when there wasn’t even a play at the plate?
by Jay on Jan 8, 2011 1:16 PM EST up reply actions
Adam Dunn, during the Strasburg game? I was there and didn’t even see what happened.
Moved from swan pool terrace (swan) to fresh restaurant (dolphin).
“adam dunn carlos santana” is a google autocomplete, so yeah.
Here: http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=8961373
Moved from swan pool terrace (swan) to fresh restaurant (dolphin).
Kalish did nothing wrong. Just another rookie trying to make an impression. Presumably he wasn’t trying to tear up somebody’s knee (a la Pete). I’m sure he was hoping the throw came in time for Santana to adjust or brace himself, and move his knee out of the basepath. That said, I’m all for plugging him, just for the hell of it.
Look at somebody like Mike Scioscia, who had a rep for being good at blocking the plate. I could be wrong, but I don’t remember him tearing up his knee.
By the way, your enforcement principle would still work, because how many times does a pitcher in the AL bowl over a catcher at the plate?
That said, I’m all for plugging him, just for the hell of it.
Yeah, I kind of agree. It ought to be understood and even expected.
by Jay on Jan 8, 2011 7:03 PM EST up reply actions
If the opposing team’s catcher or second baseman is their best hitter and your base runner has the chance to take him out, why wouldn’t you? And if Santana can play 3B, even a little, and we desperately need a 3B with power, why wouldn’t we have him play there?
I would be fine with having Santana play third if we didn’t have one of our best prospects, and a pretty highly regarded player at that, waiting in the wings. Are we better long-term with Santana at C and Chisenhall at 3B, or Marson at C and Santana at 3B?
What if you get an extra 30 games from a healthy Santana that way? I think Brantley will be playing anyways. It’s LaPorta who makes me nervous.
What if i make up any hypothetical I want to fit my argument? So its LaPorta or Marson, the former was a better hitter last year with a much higher scouting regard at the plate. If we’re sitting here scared that all our good players are going to get hurt, then lets just put out the Columbus roster. What if Santana plays 140 games a year, and looks like Mauer both offensively and defensively? Then what?
This only seems like a good idea because we haven’t developed a good player at either position in the past decade. That streak has to end sometime, though, and at that point, the idea of shifting around three players will start to look a little daft.
So Santana plays third until Chisenhall is ready. Then move Santana to first base. It is also possible Chisenhall doesn’t make it at third.
I’m sorry, but the 1B-C delta is where positional value has to observed. You’re talking about 25 runs at that point, and it’s not even a situation like Victor, where his defense was potentially superior at 1B and pretty mediocre at C.
Moving a skilled catcher to first base is, in the abstract, like slashing your payroll by about $12 million.
Is Carlos a skilled catcher? Sure didn’t look that way behind the plate in 2010. If Chisenhall pans out as a good third baseman, then you can worry about what to do with Santana. Maybe he should play second, like Biggio.
Aside from problems with passed balls, Santana was great at controlling the running game.
"An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools" -Hemingway
by notthatnoise on Jan 15, 2011 5:06 PM EST up reply actions
Your 25 runs are abstract, not real. It doesn’t do you much good to have a catcher who hits like a first baseman when your first baseman has a .388 slugging percentage in 557 big league at-bats. Theoretically, you’re right, but practically it doesn’t help you score runs.
It does when you sign a free agent first baseman who slugs 150 points higher than a similarly priced free agent catcher.
Where are these 150+ first basemen? The presumption is they grow on trees. Where are the Steve Balbonis of today?
I don’t know what 150+ figure you think you’re talking about.
I think you will find that catchers who post a 650 OPS are about as scarce as first basemen who post an 800 OPS, and so forth. That is the 150.
150+ = first basemen who slug 150 points than a similarly priced free agent catcher.
Where are these free agent first basemen who OPS .800?
He was available, that’s my point.
762 last year, 838 the year before, 805 for his career. Cost a grand total of $5 million on a one-year deal, following a down season. There’s your 800 OPS guy.
Or, as Andrew points out, Branyan certainly fits the description.
Now, then, where’s your affordable catcher with the 650 OPS?
You’ve been playing too much fantasy baseball. You can;t just take a guy, move him wherever it’s convenient, and expect things to be great. Jason Donald showed how hard that is.
Come on, four billion!
Perhaps it would make sense to see if Chisenhall actually makes it to the big leagues before worrying about where to play him. Another radical idea: if you have two premium third basemen, trade one of them.
Except that Santana hasn’t played third above Single-A at all, and he’s never been a regular third baseman as a pro at any level.
He played zero games there 2008-2010, five games in 2007, 38 in 2006, 14 in 2005. He’s played more outfield than third base. He’d be learning on the job in the majors.
You know what that means? A higher chance of injury.
Still a higher chance of injury.
Don’t get me wrong, I actually have posted many times about moving him to third base, especially given that we acquired him while Kelly Shoppach was hitting the crap out of the ball and Victor was still under contract for two more seasons. I just don’t think you do it in the majors, or when your prize prospect is a third baseman who’s already well into Double-A, or when you have so many other guys who can play the position for a while.
You present a situation where the Indians have no choice but to run him out behind the plate every day until his knees are shot (he’ll already be much slower when we see him play in 2011) and he can take foul balls off his top hand. Allow his skills to diminish at a faster rate than they might in left field because he might run into a wall? The Astros converted Biggio from catcher to second base in spring training of the 1992 season. I doubt Johnny Bench needed extensive sessions in the Arizona Fall League to learn how to play first base. I think the Indians make position changes out to be much bigger deals than they can be. Jhonny Peralta wigged out about moving to third, but if he had played a few games there before assuming the position full-time, maybe it wouldn’t have been such a big deal.
Regarding my previous post on Brantley, this is the kind of list we need to see Brantley place prominently on in the future. And it turns out if you go to the original numbers published by BP, Brantley is at 19th. Double his numbers to a full season and he would have been fourth…a good sign going forward.
The only way the Indians will be any better then last year is if Sizemore and Hafner have career years. Both have given the Indians nothing but the disabled list play for 2 years and haven’t performed above average for three. Their pitchig staff last year looked like it might compete with second level division teams but it’s even more questionable in 2011. Why they even continue to carry Valbuena on the roster is a complete mystery. Like Marte he’s been like a yo-yo between the minors and the majors. He can’t hit his weight and he’s a below average fielder. Why don’t they just admit he’ll never make it at the major league level, cut him and save an half million dollars. I don’t see any improvement over last years club unless everyone on the club performs above expectations. Looks like another year of jokes and raspberries.
The only way the Indians will be any better then last year is if Sizemore and Hafner have career years
Given what Sizemore and Hafner’s career years look like, you realize this alone, without any positive contributions from anyone on the team, would pretty much make them as good as 2009-2010, right? You also realize that there is close to 0% chance of that happening. But did you read any of the stuff I wrote, in this entry or previous ones, about some of the young guys? I think you are being intentionally pessimistic if you don’t see substantial room for positives in these guys. As for Valbuena, you only have to go back one season to see a lot of positive in his batting line. It is nearly impossible to find good things in his 2010 performance, but I am glad the Indians didn’t cut ties with him that quickly. I’m about to eat some pancakes though, so I wouldn’t mind some raspberries.
Valbuena is not in the running for a starting job, yet half of your 2011 appraisal is devoted to him. It doesn’t appear that you know anything about any players that have joined the club since January 2009, whether from the minors or through trades.
I do appreciate your solid grammar and spelling, however.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Let's Go Tribe
Related FanShots on Let's Go Tribe
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
Featured Stories
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- The Juice: Bryce Harper’s triple against Halladay keys Nats win, Dodgers roar back
- Heather Nabozny of Tigers, Nicole Sherry of Orioles: Women groundskeepers in MLB
- 10 notable team reps for MLB’s upcoming draft
- Rays’ gladiator helmets: Fernando Rodney, Joel Peralta do as Romans do (VIDEO)
- Rickie Weeks forgets number of outs, passes up chance for inning-ending double play (VIDEO)
