Missing Matt LaPorta
by APV on Jan 31, 2012 6:00 PM EST
in Analysis
Email
PrintThe acquisition of Russ Canzler is the perfect segue into a look back at Matt LaPorta's 2011 relative to some of my thoughts from a year ago on what has ailed the disappointing "slugger." In the comments to that piece, I suggested a few positive indicators to look for from Matt in 2011.
- Higher average ball speed on HRs (>105)
- Fewer balls hit to the right side of the field (<25%)
- Greater performance on balls hit the opposite way (>.400 OPS)
- Fewer swinging strikes (<11%)
- Less swinging at pitches outside of the zone (<30%)
- Greater contact on pitches overall (>75%)
122 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Nice.
My write up would have been:
Matt LaPorta was supposed to be good according to both his scouting reports and minor league stats. Turns out he sucks and his sucking is a large obstacle to the Indians contending in 2012.
What I really hate is that he’s now 27 and, instead of being exciting lead-ins to what should be the beginning of his peak seasons, the last two years make you wonder if the guy is just going to be on a career injury/recovery cycle with lower performance peaks and longer injury stretches as he ages. Truth is, though, I’m stupidly optimistic. We could really use a good season from him, and I’m hoping we see it. So does Boras.
the last two years make you wonder if the guy is just going to be on a career injury/recovery cycle with lower performance peaks and longer injury stretches as he ages.
Korean League in two years.
Though I look right at home, I still feel like an exile
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Jan 31, 2012 8:47 PM EST up reply actions
His AAA stats suggest Japan League is his floor. There’s a major league regular in there somewhere.
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Jan 31, 2012 8:55 PM EST up reply actions
You should probably consider his ML stats as well in making that last statement. Those stats seem to say otherwise.
by hans on Feb 1, 2012 12:41 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I want to be positive about Laporta, but this breakdown is depressing. Maybe we can pull a Shin Soo Choo at 1B.
De La Cruz for Brandon Allen?
Justin Masterson for Kendrys Morales?
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Jan 31, 2012 8:47 PM EST reply actions
history shows that hitters recover from long term injuries quite well. Injury is the only way you get a hitter like Morales for Masterson.
If he’s healthy this year, he will be worth more than Masterson by mid-May.
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Feb 2, 2012 2:22 AM EST up reply actions
Are you serious? He’s not Albert Pujols. Masterson’s best season (4.9 WAR) was better than Morales (3.4 WAR). At most you’ve just shuffled 4~ WAR away for 4~ WAR in return (I know you have to consider replacements but you’re not getting much bang for your buck when you replace Matt LaPorta/New guy from TB value by Jeanmar Gomez value). Kind of spinning your tires there, right?
He had a .382 wOBA and 34 HRs in a pitcher’s park. WAR dinged him for baserunning. I’m not a fan of WAR at all. I don’t buy the baserunning and defensive metrics, as they are highly subjective.
I think Masterson is a good pitcher. I’d take Morales for him though. Just my personal opinion. I realize there is a good argument against doing this.
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Feb 2, 2012 4:47 PM EST up reply actions
Please let me know where you and your friend Kendry will be sitting to watch the games, as I would like to stop by and offer you a chance to purchase some magic beans I recently acquired.
Seriously, Morales last played a major league game on May 29th, 2010. Not 2011. 2010. And you would give up Justin Masterson for him? Are you sure you didn’t mean to post this on Halos Heaven?
by InfiniteMonkeyTypists on Feb 2, 2012 6:19 PM EST up reply actions
I think Masterson’s weaknesses vs lefties are permanent. It’s just how his stuff plays. This limits his upside.
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Feb 2, 2012 2:21 AM EST up reply actions
You realize that Masterson’s weakness against lefties resulted in a .746 OPS against right? And that, coupled with his absolute domination of righties (.560), resulted in a pretty great performance.
by APV on Feb 2, 2012 8:07 AM EST up reply actions
Which was almost exactly league average last year. So lefties are league average and righties are miserable. I think I’ll keep him.
Matt LaPorta is the bane of my existence.
Went looking for the BIP split expecting he’d had some good luck in 2011. I was wrong — .321 BABIP against lefty batters in 2011.
To clarify, the 746 OPS is league average for LHB vs. RHP, not for LHB overall.
In sum, Masterson was about exactly average as a RHP facing lefties. He was far above average as a RHP facing righties.
by Jay on Feb 2, 2012 7:09 PM EST up reply actions
Thus my point. I don’t see how his incredible ability to dominate righties will improve much, therefore, any improvement will more likely have to come vs lefties.
I think his fastball/slider combo is maxed out vs lefties given his extreme sidearm motion, so unless he adds another pitch, I doubt he takes the next step to elite.
I believe Morales is an elite player. History shows that batters recover extremely well from even long term injuries like this. Perhaps we could squeeze out another pitching prospect for the risk, but based on what I’m reading, I don’t think it’s necessary. It’s possible his recovery hasn’t gone as well as reported. I’m reading he’s fine now.
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Feb 3, 2012 1:37 AM EST up reply actions
Why does he need to improve, though? You wouldn’t be pleased with him simply repeating 2011 over and over for a few seasons?
I’d be delighted. I think I’m being misinterpreted here.
I really really like Masterson. I love Morales. We agree on how good Masterson. I think Morales is the type of hitter that is usually out of the Indians’ price range via FA, and it’s very difficult to develop a guy like him.
We’re not disagreeing on Masterson. We’re disagreeing on Morales.
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Feb 3, 2012 2:02 AM EST up reply actions
I’m more confused with your love of Morales. He is freakishly broken in a way that is hard to project his recovery. On top of that, his career best isn’t really that great.
by APV on Feb 3, 2012 9:27 AM EST up reply actions
Dude’s a beast. I’d be gambling on his health for sure. If healthy, him and Pujols are going to destroy this league.
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Feb 3, 2012 10:55 AM EST up reply actions
He has been, at times, very good, but “beast” like? He has average contact abilities, but not to the extent of Vlad Guerrero in his prime, where his unwillingness to take a walk doesn’t hurt him. That makes his success heavily dependent on his power and luck on balls in play, the former of which was only really “very good” in 2009. These numbers become even worse when you realize that he is limited to first-base at best, and DH at worst.
The Angels held him back way too long and screwed with his playing time. In his first full year where they left him alone, he almost won the MVP.
I’m very high on him, and I’m reserving judgement until he can establish himself as a long term regular. Based on his minor league performance and his absolute destruction of major league pitching in his first regular stint, I think his contact rates will improve drastically eventually.
I think he’s going to be a mega-star.
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Feb 3, 2012 11:44 AM EST up reply actions
For context, Kenny Lofton had EIGHT seasons that were better than that, and two of them were strike-shortened.
Proving, as usual, that Lofton is criminally underrated outside of Cleveland.
Though I look right at home, I still feel like an exile
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Feb 3, 2012 5:42 PM EST up reply actions
65.3 WAR for Lofton’s career.
Barry Larkin, 68.9, HOF.
Just sayin’.
by Bogalusa Bomber on Feb 5, 2012 5:04 AM EST up reply actions
Again, dinged a .380 wOBA for “baserunning”.
War, what is it good for? (rhetorical)
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Feb 4, 2012 1:24 AM EST up reply actions
He was dinged for three marginal runs — not wins, runs. Stole three bases and was caught seven times. I see nothing excessive in this.
More to the point, Lofton still had eight better seasons.
by Jay on Feb 4, 2012 2:45 PM EST up reply actions
Lofton is one of my favorite players of all time. Doesn’t change the fact that I think good defense is overrated, and that Morales can be great.
We are comparing one of the best players of the past 20 years with a guy who’d had 1 full season.
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Feb 4, 2012 3:08 PM EST up reply actions
You’re the one who said Morales was a near-MVP. Lofton never finished in the Top 3 and only twice in the 10. I think it’s a fair comparison given the kind of claims you made about that one season.
by Jay on Feb 4, 2012 6:14 PM EST up reply actions
I didn’t see he’s a near MVP, the baseball writers did when they voted him 5th in his first full season in major league baseball.
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Feb 4, 2012 7:42 PM EST up reply actions
So you’re now claiming that you weren’t saying he was a great player, that you were only claiming he had a great rep?
Come on. “You have a point” isn’t that hard to say, is it?
by Jay on Feb 5, 2012 2:00 AM EST up reply actions
Hence, it takes a lot more than common language to communicate.
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Feb 5, 2012 2:58 AM EST up reply actions
Let me re-phrase this. Would you have taken a healthy Morneau for a guy like Masterson?
Morneau was my comp for Morales as a prospect, and I actually think I may have undersold him. I think Morales is a Morneau with slightly more power and a better arm.
Like I said, we disagree on Morales, not Masterson. I love Masterson, but there’s a price for everyone.
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Feb 3, 2012 2:08 AM EST up reply actions
I think the disagreement might really be over how to interpret Morales’ injury. Post-2011 Masterson for pre-2010 injury Morales is a discussion for me. Morales after this layoff? Just doesn’t have Masterson’s value, currently. If he did, Pujols likely wouldn’t be in LA.
Right.
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Feb 3, 2012 10:53 AM EST up reply actions
O me, what eyes hath Love put in thy head?
Mesmerized, thine optic nerve is able,
Where others, in this pinup o’er thy bed,
See Ethel Mertz, to see Betty Grable.
Thy shining object, with its blinding glint,
Hath roused within thee a covetous strain.
Wouldst thou discard, as so much pocket lint,
Our youthful master, to soothe fever’d brain?
When gauzy veil is lifted from thy face,
And daylight pierces nighttime’s ebon skirt,
Willst thou note Kendrys’ plunging doubles pace,
Fewer walks, more balls bounding in the dirt?
When last we saw him playing on the field:
He hops, and is carried out on his shield.
by YoDaddyWags on Feb 3, 2012 8:27 AM EST up reply actions 5 recs
I think the confusion is simply that nobody else is worrying about Masterson’s capacity to improve, which admittedly is probably quite small. We just want him to hold on to what he’s already achieved.
If he does it again, I’ll buy into him. I have concern that last season is the high end of his range, and his value can only go down, which is a dangerous place to be with a pitcher.
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Feb 3, 2012 11:02 AM EST up reply actions
I don’t see anything “dangerous” about it. Evidently, eating 200 innings even at Fauxberto level is worth a $7 million salary. Masterson is highly likely to be at least somewhat better than that. He was four Wins better than replacement last season, which is about two Wins better than average, and average is worth a lot. He’s healthy, he’s consistently been around 6.5 innings per start.
Anytime you have a player who is a valuable asset, there is a “danger” that his value will go down and for pitchers even a likelihood of it. But it’s trifling to act like that’s bad news; it’s more like a good problem to have.
It’s almost as if you want him to pitch worse, so you can have more upside to hope for.
It’s more like, “I’d consider selling high in exchange for buying low on Morales, who has a higher ceiling.”
Please don’t marginalize my view as sentiment.
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Feb 4, 2012 1:22 AM EST up reply actions
What choice do I have, when I can’t make logical sense of them? You’re devaluing a guy based on having reached his (probable) ceiling.
If you want to make the case that we should sell high on him, I’m open to that. But that has to be accompanied by a pessimistic but sober evaluation of his projected value.
There is nothing evidently wrong with Masterson. Even if you were confident that he would regress all the way back to his 2010 level, trading him for Morales would still be completely indefensible.
by Jay on Feb 4, 2012 2:51 PM EST up reply actions
“Indefensible”? Come on dude. He finished top 5 in his only full, healthy season and he’s only 29 years old.
Even if you disagree, do you really believe it’s “indefensible”?
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Feb 4, 2012 11:08 PM EST up reply actions
Injuries aren’t a good thing. You don’t get to say it was his only full season and act like that’s a positive indicator.
I like ex-Phillies prospects.
by Gradyforpresident on Feb 5, 2012 1:38 AM EST up reply actions
But up above, you claim that YOU don’t think he was Top 5, only the voters did. So which is it?
Anyway, yes. I’m saying not only that I don’t agree, but that I couldn’t even make the argument for it.
It is indefensible. It would be mocked by literally every commentator.
by Jay on Feb 5, 2012 2:01 AM EST up reply actions
Masterson is coming off a 4.1 WAR season, better than Morales’ peak of 3.6 oWAR in 2009. Kendrys was on pace for another 3.6 when he hurt himself on May 29, 2010. He’s yet to play since then, though he’s presumably in the best shape of his life and raring to go.
Morales top six age comps (hey, there’s Reggie Jefferson! Fred Whitfield! Garko!!) went on to compile 8 oWAR over their next three seasons, which is how long the Indians control Masterson. Masterson’s top six comps put up 19.3 WAR in their next three seasons.
Justin for Kendrys is a no-go, pending better arguments for it.
I know his tendencies quite well. If he can repeat last years numbers, I’ll be a believer.
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Feb 2, 2012 4:43 PM EST up reply actions
Compared to 2010, he really didn’t get worlds better against lefties: 110 sOPS+ vs. 101; he became devastating against righties: 94 vs 64. So, when you look at it, 2008’s poor numbers against lefties seem like the outlier.
Matt LaPorta is the bane of my existence.
Judging by his K:BB, he improved drastically vs lefties in my eyes. He surrendered less HRs in more ABs too.
I’m guessing you mean 2009 OPS against as an outlier, which is fair. The jump in his K:BB is what’s really encouraging for me. If he threw a better change or added a splitter, I’d be more optimistic about his upside. I’ve been on your side of the argument before. It’s more about how high on Morales I am, than being low on Masterson.
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Feb 2, 2012 5:13 PM EST up reply actions
Yes, I did mean 2009, thank you. But I think you’re pointing to his increased production against lefties, not the first sign of production. 2010 showed he could get them out, 2011 showed he could do by missing their bats.
So the question: Is a good (not great) 1B worth a front-end starter? I feel like good 1B are easier to find than very good, power starters.
Matt LaPorta is the bane of my existence.
Who is going to pitch if we trade Masterson?
by Bogalusa Bomber on Feb 5, 2012 4:54 AM EST up reply actions
Matt LaPorta is the bane of my existence.
by USSChoo on Feb 5, 2012 1:01 PM EST up reply actions 3 recs
In fairness both to Masterson and you, he faced 513 lefties in 2011. It’s not a conclusive sample size, but it isn’t tiny either.
This should not be confused with a lefty batter, who may only face lefty pitchers 150 or so times in a season. Thus, lefty batter splits for a single season are far less statistically significant than a starting pitcher’s versus-lefty-batter splits for a single season.
by Jay on Feb 2, 2012 7:12 PM EST up reply actions
Here is a question I have (big hypothetical, yes): If LaPorta shows major progress at 1B early in the season but the Indians aren’t contending like expected, does Antonetti try to flip him a la Broussard or does he take his progress as genuine and permanent?
Matt LaPorta is the bane of my existence.
If the moon was really made of cheese, should we harvest it?
by hans on Feb 1, 2012 12:42 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I’d say we keep him under those circumstances. He will just be entering his arb years after this season and, if he’s hitting well, then let him hit here for a couple more years.
by MTF on Feb 1, 2012 6:42 AM EST up reply actions
Given the absence of Ed Wade and Bill Bavasi among the ranks of MLB GMs, I’m gonna say no.
by Jay on Feb 1, 2012 2:47 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
if we fall short it will likely be because we’ve not drafted, traded for, or developed an impact corner bat. laporta’s ineptitude is crippling.
even if he were mediocre but with some signs of an 825 ops year, we’d be a million times better off. but he’s just bad.
I like ex-Phillies prospects.
by Gradyforpresident on Feb 1, 2012 1:27 AM EST reply actions
Cantlzer looks like Casey Blake 2.0… ugh!!!
Baseball fans are junkies, and their heroin is the statistic. - Robert S. Wieder
So he’s, “The guy who got netted the Indians Carlos Santana 2.0”. Sweet!
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Feb 1, 2012 4:32 AM EST up reply actions
If I’m ever having a bad day at work I think of that trade and it turns my day around.
by Aussie Wahoo on Feb 1, 2012 7:50 AM EST via mobile up reply actions 3 recs
How the hell did the Indians swing that? An impact, very highly ranked catching prospect for 2 years of an average 3rd baseman?
Right. He was signed for 2008 only when the Indians traded him, the Dodgers chose to extend him. We paid his entire $6.1m contract that year for it to work. Worth it.
Matt LaPorta is the bane of my existence.
At first I thought this said the McCourts pawned the team.
"Lotta heart in Cleveland." - Ian Hunter
by Denver Tribe Fan on Feb 2, 2012 1:38 AM EST up reply actions
we also got that guy who couldn’t spell Malone right.
by stuart dean on Feb 1, 2012 2:04 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
Just for the record.
We paid nothing to get Blake.
We paid him $15.8 million over 5.6 seasons, about $2.8 million per season.
He produced 12.8 WAR, about 2.3 extra wins per season.
And Carlos Santana.
by Jay on Feb 1, 2012 2:50 PM EST up reply actions 4 recs
So, thinking aloud about about that 1B/RH-bat situation and the 25-man roster, here is where we stand right now:
On the 40-man:
Matt LaPorta (1 option remaining)
Russ Canzler (3 options remaining)
Aaron Cunningham (0 options remaining)
In Columbus:
Beau Mills (bats left)
Jared Goedert
Free Agents:
Casey Kotchman (bats left)
Derrek Lee
Cord Phelps (2 options left) and Jason Donald (1 option left) also factor slightly into this, as they represent right-handed utility bats (Phelps is a switch-hitter) that could compete for a roster spot.
Given that Cunningham has zero options left, he has a leg up on an initial 25-man roster spot. I think that, in turn, puts LaPorta ahead of Canzler for a spot.
Assuming the Indians use a 12-man pitching staff, I see the favorites to break camp with the team are as follows:
RF: Choo
CF: Sizemore
LF: Brantley
4OF: Cunningham
1B: LaPorta
2B: Kipnis
SS: Cabrera
3B: Chisenhall
C: Santana
BC: Marson
DH: Hafner
UI: Hannahan
U: Donald
The loser in this scenario is Duncan, who also doesn’t have any options remaining. Under this scenario there would basically be a 3-way battle for 2 spots, backup OF and part-time 1B, between Cunningham, Duncan and LaPorta. Given his ability to play all 3 OF spots in a crunch, I guess I see Cunningham as close to a lock. If Duncan beats out LaPorta, Matt can be optioned to Columbus. Duncan, although he has played more than 300 games at first in the minors, has only played 38 games there at the majors. But if Santana gets half the starts at first anyway, and Hannahan can be used there as well, maybe that wouldn’t be such a big deal. Duncan, LaPorta and Cunningham (and to a lesser extent, Canzler) have strong motivation to look great during spring training.
The other just misses are the utility infielder losers, likely consisting of Cord Phelps and a NRI or two (i.e. Jose Lopez). Given the Indians proclivity towards talent-maximizing strategies, it is possible with a good spring someone like Lopez could make the team and bump Donald, who has an option remaining, off the starting roster. Those two occupy identical positional/hitting skills, so they appear to be in direct competition. If the starting outfield of Brantley, Choo and Sizemore get through spring training healthy, I think the ability of a 4th OF to play CF is less important, as Brantley or Choo could sub in when Grady rests. And, if as I presume, Cunningham is the 4th OF anyway, he can also cover CF. That would leave Ezequiel Carrera and again, an NRI or two (i.e. Felix Pie) back in Columbus. I know Pie’s pedigree makes him exciting, but he seems like a longshot barring injury to one of the starters given the option status of Duncan and Cunningham. The only other spot seems to be the starting 3B job, between Chisenhall and Hannahan. I would be shocked if this were anything other than a competition between Chisenhall and himself, though. If he looks ready in spring, I can’t see how the job is not his. I think Hannahan gets the starting spot only if Chisenhall shows significant plate approach issues in spring that the team wants him to fine-tune in Columbus. In that case, his spot probably goes to someone like Lopez.
So, in summary.
Spring training positional competitions:
RH 1B: Laporta vs. Duncan (Canzler long-shot)
4th OF: Cunningham vs. Duncan (Pie long-shot)
Utility infielder: Donald vs. Phelps/NRIs
by APV on Feb 1, 2012 10:34 AM EST reply actions 6 recs
I’m very surprised you think they’d keep LaPorta over Duncan in your initial scenario. I don’t see much of any reason to do that—Duncan was better last year, is more versatile defensively, and has an option. What’s it going to hurt to send LaPorta down?
As I was writing/thinking aloud, I became less sure of that. I think it might be closer to a real toss-up and depend on how they perform and look during the spring. My nod to LaPorta is basically a nod to having at least one actual first baseman on the roster, and LaPorta’s 200 starts at that position for Cleveland far exceed his competition. But that is, admittedly, a pretty weak argument. I suppose this is just as likely:
RF: Choo
CF: Sizemore
LF: Brantley
4OF: Cunningham
1B: Duncan
2B: Kipnis
SS: Cabrera
3B: Chisenhall
C: Santana
BC: Marson
DH: Hafner
UI: Hannahan
U: Donald
The starting lineup on that squad, listed by OPS+ 2009-2011 average (where applicable):
Choo, RF: 134
Kipnis, 2B: 131*
Santana, C: 128*
Hafner, DH: 126
Duncan, 1B: 110
Cabrera, SS: 110
Sizemore, CF: 98
Chisenhall, 3B: 93*
Brantley, LF: 88
A Sizemore bounceback and development from Brantley and Chisenhall, and that doesn’t look too bad.
Adding the defensive ratings for the primary positions you have them listed at, according to the recent ZIPS projection
Choo, RF: AV
Kipnis, 2B: AV
Santana, C: FR (catcher’s ratings are arm only)
Duncan, 1B: FR
Cabrera, SS: FR
Sizemore, CF: AV
Chisenhall, 3B: VG
Brantley, LF: VG
On a EX>VG>AV>FR>PO scale.
Chisenhall’s rating was a surprise to me but the overall infield defense doesn’t look so good by this projection.
Hannahan gets an EX for 3B, AV for 1B. Cunningham is AV/PO/FR for LF, CF, and RF respectively. Donald is AV at 2B and 3B, FR at SS.
by InfiniteMonkeyTypists on Feb 1, 2012 12:36 PM EST up reply actions
I think Kipnis has a chance to become a real good second baseman.
Though I look right at home, I still feel like an exile
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Feb 1, 2012 6:04 PM EST up reply actions
I don’t think we’ll be disappointed with his defense, but I could definitely see him have a stretch of games like Phelps went through last year.
I meant long-term, not necessarily in April. He just seemed to be very athletic in the field when I saw him. He’s still learning to play, but I think he has the ability.
Though I look right at home, I still feel like an exile
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Feb 2, 2012 5:43 PM EST up reply actions
I know Choo can get a little loopy in the field, but I thought the arm would push him into VG territory.
Matt LaPorta is the bane of my existence.
What do the * denote?
Len Barker Perfect Game Attendee
by PortlandVinny on Feb 1, 2012 12:40 PM EST up reply actions
Just figured it out, not comprehensive of 2009-2011.
Len Barker Perfect Game Attendee
by PortlandVinny on Feb 1, 2012 12:41 PM EST up reply actions
I wrote this in another thread, but I think Donald is assured a 25 man spot as the UT. It’s not really close in terms of defensive ability and ML experience and performance.
And given that Hannahan is the superlative defensive corner IF (the only one), to me it seems the competition boils down to 1B and 4th OF, where you have a real performance based competition in ST.
Given that Cunningham has no options left, and was acquired specifically for the role, he definitely has the leg up for the 4th OF spot. And for the most topical point, you’re right – LaPorta was and is the heir apparent at 1B, a good ST will seal it for the opening day roster. Not much point sending him down to Columbus if there’s not a clear upgrade. He needs ML at bats, not AAA ones.
But for both those spots, I think if someone in the mix has a real good ST, they could take it.
Btw, does Duncan have an option left? That would enter into it as well.
When in doubt, check out Tony’s site. Here is his most recent update to the options chart.
by APV on Feb 1, 2012 9:38 PM EST up reply actions
I always feel weird saying anything about typos, but I knew you’d want that fixed.
Matt LaPorta is the bane of my existence.
This is like that Friends episode from an early season when Rachel dates “Russ,” whom is basically a clone of Ross.
Also, did I use whom right?
I like ex-Phillies prospects.
by Gradyforpresident on Feb 1, 2012 2:16 PM EST up reply actions
The “he/they” “him/them” substitution trick is a good way to go. Rethink your sentence: “Rachel dates Russ. He is basically a clone of Ross” tells you to use ‘who.’
If you wrote “Rachel dated many men, one of whom was a clone of Ross” the mental rewrite would be “One of them was a clone of Ross”, which gives you the heads-up for ‘whom.’ Think “M=whom.”
If the entire phrase in question is an object of the preposition, punch the nearest grammarian. And use ‘who.’
By the way, we are officially three weeks out from the Tribe’s reporting date for pitchers and catchers
by APV on Feb 1, 2012 2:04 PM EST reply actions 8 recs
Did you say “OMG,” or “Oh My God” but thought “OMG”?
I like ex-Phillies prospects.
by Gradyforpresident on Feb 2, 2012 2:26 AM EST up reply actions
I said “Oh My God” out loud, with nobody in the room.
by Jay on Feb 2, 2012 7:13 PM EST up reply actions
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
- The Juice: Nelson Cruz matches career high eight RBIs, Pujols stays hot in Seattle
- Benches clear at Fenway as Red Sox-Rays rivalry heats up
- Keeping good company: Albert Pujols becomes fourth-youngest player to hit 450 home runs
- Giancarlo Stanton misses cutoff man, and Logan Morrison is thankful he did (Video)
- Snoop Dogg delivers memorable first pitch at U.S. Cellular Field
