Today we mark the second day of full squad workouts with the Making The Team Meter for the hitters. Click here for all previous MTM's.
There are many a safe hitters, here are the folks we are assuming have already made the team:
Starting Lineup: Brian McCann, Troy Glaus, Martin Prado, Yunel Escobar, Chipper Jones, Matt Diaz, and Nate McLouth (1 spot available, RF)
Bench: David Ross, Eric Hinske, Melky Cabrera, and Omar Infante (1 spot available)
We all know who we want to see in right field. Besides that "battle" the hottest battle on the team might be for that last bench spot, which will likely be a utility infielder.
| Player, Position | Chance | ...Notes... |
|---|---|---|
| Clint Sammons, C |  |
He's still the backup to the backup catcher. He is what he is, but unless there's an injury to McCann or Ross, Sammons will start the year up I-85 in Gwinnett. |
| Brooks Conrad, 2B |  |
Brooksy has a real good chance to make the team as a pinch hitter and utility infielder. It will be interesting to see if he gets into any spring games at first base or third base or the outfield, all of which could increase his flexibility as a bench player. |
| Diory Hernandez, SS | |
After injuring his shoulder in Winter Ball, Diory had surgery and will be out until mid-season. |
| Gregor Blanco, OF | |
Blanco usually has really good springs, so it will be interesting to see how much playing time he gets and if he does do well, what the team will do with him. Right now, there doesn't seem to be an open spot, and he does have an option left. |
| Jordan Schafer, OF | |
He's in spring to prove to everyone that he's back, still, he'll probably find himself in Gwinnett. |
| Frederick Freeman, 1B | |
With Glaus entrenched at first base for at least this year, Freeman is in camp to show the team he has improved since last spring. |
| Brandon Hicks, SS | |
Hicks is an interesting case, because he may be the preferred offensive replacement in case of injury as opposed to someone like Diory Hernandez. I'm interested to see if his excellent last month of the season and AFL performance means he really has turned a corner. |
| Joe Thurston, 2B | |
Journeyman middle infielder has some good all around skills and could figure into the last utility infield spot. He gets an edge because of the injury to Hernandez. |
| Brent Clevlen, OF | |
A power-hitting four-A type slugger. He and Mitch Jones have similar pedigrees, and it will be interesting to see if we catch lightening in a bottle with either. |
| Jason Heyward, OF |  |
I'm not sure who this is... I'm checking, and I'll get back to you. |
| Cody Johnson, OF | |
I bet we hear stories about him and how he murdered a bunch of batting practice fastballs. Maybe one of the veterans can get in his ear about controlling the strike zone. |
| Mitch Jones, OF | |
Four-A slugger who has a shot, especially if Heyward isn't ready. |
| Matt Young, OF | |
Glad to see Matt Young here. He had a great showing in the Mexican League this winter, hitting .315/.435/.523 with 8 homeruns and 21 stolen bases. I'd like to see this kid find a place somewhere, but he's blocked by Melky and Gregor. |
| Arrow Key: |
|---|
| = Chance of making the team is even. |
| = Chance of making the team is going down. |
| = Chance of making the team is going up. |
0 recs | 123 comments
Heyward reportedly
hit 2 cars in the parking lot during BP. What a boss.
nathan rothschild - February 24, 2010
Brooks Conrad for the last utility spot. This guy will be a valuable guy to have on the bench and in the field. Matt Young really deserves a chance as well.
I want to hear how Cody does though. Hopefully he’s soaking in some knowledge from Chipper, McCann, etc.
Sparhawk - February 24, 2010
How does Freeman or Cody Johnson go down?...
both weren’t making it, and now, they still aren’t making it. Seems level to me.
Mr. Sanchez - February 24, 2010
Isn’t this the first one?
justincredubil02 - February 24, 2010
But how can...
“Chance of making the team is going down.” if it was always at 0?
Mr. Sanchez - February 24, 2010
I’m not sure if that is the intent of these things…I think the red generally means “Not going to happen”, green means “will probably happen” and blue means “toss-up”.
I don’t think it means “going up” or “going down”…at least, not at this point.
justincredubil02 - February 24, 2010
+1
for logic
gondeee - February 24, 2010
then...
change the definitions, because as stated it implies relative to prior chances, not just the chance in general.
Mr. Sanchez - February 24, 2010
You can’t go around changing definitions just because a few people interpret something different. I get paid to interpret rules, but they don’t go around changing them.
It’s gonna make ALOT more sense to you once we start seeing what these guys do.
bwellnjonesco - February 24, 2010
Except for the fact that those EXACT words, “going up” and “going down” are used in the legend.
The definitions need to be clearer.
hoboken_wood - February 24, 2010
But in that definition...
it doesn’t say the player, just their chances. The chance Cody Johnson had of making the team was 0, and now, it’s 0. That’s not going down, that’s remaining the same.
Mr. Sanchez - February 24, 2010
scstrato - February 24, 2010
Just asked a question...
sorry if justin’s reply and my response to him are annoying. I was just curious how a player’s chances go down when they never existed to begin with? If gondee simply meant the player goes down, not their chance to make the team relative to a week, a month, a day ago, so be it. But I’ve still yet to see a response saying as much other than some +1 for logic. A simple response to the question would have ended any further discussion between one poster and another, and not the one person actually asked.
Mr. Sanchez - February 24, 2010
Aw c'mon
I realize my sense of humor is rather strange but was it really that hard to tell that I was just poking fun?
scstrato - February 24, 2010
Did you use sarcasm font?...
then yes, I missed it. I shouldn’t have, but I did.
Mr. Sanchez - February 24, 2010
Pretty sure neither of us were arguing.
How is it that you and I get put in the same division in the fantasy league? That is like Yankees/RedSox epic.
justincredubil02 - February 24, 2010
Haha
I just figured SB was giving you the chance to avenge last year’s, uh-hmm, failure to make the playoffs!!
scstrato - February 24, 2010
I have never in my life heard of a team with fewer wins making the playoffs…lol
I just can’t let that one die! This year, I had better bring it though, because I have been doing way too much talking for someone who didn’t even make the playoffs last year.
justincredubil02 - February 24, 2010
I think I just realized why you are “hung” on that concept. You do realize that we used a 3 category scoring system (Wins, Losses and Ties), right?
In other words, if you have a simple two outcome scoring system (only Wins or Losses) then yes the more Wins the better. Unfortunately when Ties are possible you have to look a Win% instead of total Wins or Losses.
Look at it like this, here are our records from last year:
- Me / W 103, L 94, T 13 = Win% .52284
- You / W 107, L 98, T 5 = Win% .52195
Yes you had more wins, but because I had more Ties I actually won a greater percentage of games played than you did.
Does that help?
scstrato - February 24, 2010
no…
justincredubil02 - February 24, 2010
It looks like
The NL Cy Young voting.
You’re Adam Wainwright, scstrato is Tim Lincecum.
Wins are 1st place votes, Ties are 2nd place votes, losses are 3rd place votes
You had more 1st place votes than scstrato, but he had way more 2nd place votes, and almost as many 1st place votes than you did, so it’s those 2nd place votes that tips the scale in his favor.
Man, I’m not even in your nerdy geeky fantasy Harry Potter league and I understood that.
royhobbs - February 24, 2010
hahaha. It isn’t like I don’t understand it, I just like to bring up the fact that I had more wins and missed out on the playoffs. I had arguably the hottest team in the league at the time too.
justincredubil02 - February 24, 2010
Uh
Man, I’m not even in your nerdy geeky fantasy
Harry PotterMom’s basement league and I understood that. /fixedThe “Harry Potter” league was reserved for photoshop experts!
scstrato - February 24, 2010
I don't consider fantasy to be "nerd/geek"...
I think of it more as the ultimate pleasure for those with a rosterbation addiction.
Mr. Sanchez - February 24, 2010
FTFY
J-Freak - February 24, 2010
Green
royhobbs - February 24, 2010
or maybe just ban both those guys as unruly troublemakers.
fandave - February 24, 2010
It's not a 0% chance...
In Cody’s case, he has very little chance of making the team. Everyday that passes by, Cody’s percentage chance of making the team is lower because you are decreasing the amount of time he has to earn his chance. You can’t decrease one side of the equation (time) with out decreasing the other (chance).
There you go, Gondeee’s definitions were actually correct.
bwellnjonesco - February 24, 2010
Unless the "time" was next year...
Cody always hada 0% chance, barring multiple injuries (which would still be the case as of today). Without those injuries, he’s behind a pretty long list of names and is starting in AA. So the “chance” really hasn’t decreased since as I say, it never existed to begin with.
Mr. Sanchez - February 24, 2010
If he had a 0% chance, then he wouldn’t of got the invite.
Let me put it this way, I know he has a better chance of making the Atlanta Braves out of Spring Training then I do.
bwellnjonesco - February 24, 2010
Not necessarily...
while you are correct he has a better chance than you, the invite doesn’t mean they think he makes it. As with Freeman and Heyward last year, sometimes they want to get a look at you and see how you deal with the rest of the big boys. Maybe 0% is too strong, but Cody’s chances before relied entirely on injuries, and the same is true now. It’s not like Schafer last year or Heyward this year, where a good camp might get him on the team. A good camp, and Cody is still in Mississippi trying to prove he can reduce his K rate. A bad camp, and Cody is, you guessed it, in Mississippi still trying to fine tune his approach and reduce the K rate.
Mr. Sanchez - February 24, 2010
I just want to clear up that no part of me believes Cody will make the team, I was just trying to prove my points.
bwellnjonesco - February 24, 2010
I think this is what it comes down to. Yes, in realistic terms we all understand that Cody isn’t going to make the team, but the mere fact that he’s in camp, no matter why he’s there, means he has a chance. He wouldn’t be the first guy to get brought in and all of the sudden find himself in the majors. So yes, he has a chance, even if it’s miniscule.
cbwilk - February 24, 2010
And is that chance any lower today than it was yesterday, or a week ago?
which is what the arrow seems said to indicate.
Mr. Sanchez - February 24, 2010
Mathematically it’s lower.
bwellnjonesco - February 24, 2010
Because, as you pointed out, there’s a direct correlation between time and chance, as one decreases the other decreases.
cbwilk - February 24, 2010
But with Johnson...
I don’t see how time really matters. There was no amount of time (unless we’re talking a year or two) that gets him on the club out of spring. It was a catastrophic bus accident taking out a dozen others ahead of him, or not. Time, imo, had very little impact on his chances.
Mr. Sanchez - February 24, 2010
I feel like you understand how this entire chart works perfectly but you’re just being purposefully obtuse.
cbwilk - February 24, 2010
I do now yes...
originally, it was an honest question. But from the response of you and gondee, I’m assuming the words used in describing the arrows aren’t precise.
Mr. Sanchez - February 24, 2010
I mean, that beef is with Gondeee. I didn’t make the chart and I don’t have anything to do with judging it. We’ve been using it for a few years and I think he’s been pretty accurate with it. I think you’re right, the words aren’t necessarily precise, but I think most of us have viewed it without getting upset by that.
cbwilk - February 24, 2010
Hope I didn't come across as upset...
was just curious originally, and the discussion has fleshed out my reasons in response.
“I just think it is helpful to know what words mean… with all respect.”
(and if anyone can call that movie quote, you will have my unending admiration)
Mr. Sanchez - February 24, 2010
Conspiracy
Barnaby Kay / Rudolf Lange
scstrato - February 24, 2010
And you know have it...
assuming you didn’t need google to find the answer. I do love that movie, more so for the acting and handful of great lines than the story it tells.
My favorite…
“I’ll remember you.”
“You should; I’m very well known.”
Mr. Sanchez - February 24, 2010
Haha
I’ve got 40 years of movies stuck in my head, but I have to admit I did have to look up the name of the movie. Remembered the quote though.
scstrato - February 24, 2010
I only got around 20 years...
(29, but the first few years don’t really count though), but I’m building up an impressive array of movie quotes myself. It’s amazing the random lines that will trigger scenes in my mental movie screen.
Mr. Sanchez - February 24, 2010
you NOW have it...
damn it.
Mr. Sanchez - February 24, 2010
And that is one of my favorite parts of Shawshank Redemption
“What? What did you call me?”
Mr. Sanchez - February 24, 2010
“Son, you’re forgetting yourself.” Awesome!
scstrato - February 24, 2010
Who's got two thumbs and is acting like That Guy?...
Mr. Sanchez - February 24, 2010
Bob Kelso, pleased to meet ya.
J-Freak - February 24, 2010
technically speaking there is never a 0% chance of a prediction that isnt in and of itself impossible…theres always an infinitesimal chance it could happen,so it can go down
Swo12bv - February 24, 2010
So it went from infinitesimal...
to even less infinitesimal?
Mr. Sanchez - February 25, 2010
that would be downward trending
Swo12bv - February 25, 2010
are we going to trade clint sammons?
It seems like every couple years we have a pretty good prospect at catcher, and then trade them cause McCann is entrenched there. I like that B-Mac is there i’m just wondering if thats going to happen again.
liv4sport100 - February 24, 2010
Sammons isn’t a starting caliber catcher for the MLB. At best he is a defensive backup with little to no bat.
yondaime4 - February 24, 2010
Sammons strictly projects as a backup catcher. We wouldn’t be able to get anything for him really so hopefully he will be able to backup McCann for a few years.
ajones2522 - February 24, 2010
So the question becomes: What do we do with Bethancourt?
justincredubil02 - February 24, 2010
Wait and see...
He won’t be ready for a 2-3 years at the very least. A lot can happen in that time.
Jacob Peterson - February 24, 2010
Bethancourt
Isn’t Bethancourt real young still? I’m thinking 18-19 yrs old. Sign Ross for 3 more years as McCann’s backup. When BMac turns 30 yrs old, Bethancourt will still be plenty young. One option might be Mac gets 3 pitchers, Christian gets 2. Eventually flip that. We keep McCann rested and Bethancourt gets to play regularly. I can’t see McCann playing anywhere but catcher, that might extend his playing time.
bighop - February 24, 2010
reply fail
bighop - February 24, 2010
I hope Schafer gets another chance this year.
It would be great to have a problem of trying to find a spot in the outfiled for Diaz, Schafer, McLouth, and Heyward.
taney71 - February 24, 2010
2011
I’d really like that to be our 2011 outfield. Cabrera might work out, he’s still pretty young, but he just doesn’t seem to have the bat and OB% thing worked out yet.
bighop - February 24, 2010
Me too.
I hope Cabrera does well for us as a pinch hitter and spot starter but I’m not sold on him doing much else. Being a Yankee pumped up his value.
I live in Michigan and you should hear the love feast going on for Damon. Tiger fans think he is going to be a great lead off hitter and help them a lot. Boy how do they forget he’s older now than he was back in his Boston or early Yankee days. He doesn’t have an arm and his bat isn’t where it use to be.
taney71 - February 24, 2010
Melky point
Young guys brought up in the Yankees dont have that high of a success rate…most of their studs are acquired via players selling their sould to the evil side(there are exceptions of course..few) It probably is pretty tough to deal with the pinstripes and everything tht comes with wearing them. Is it too hard to believe he may be a very good player that just needed a taste of normalcy. you see it happen all the time in sports, young promising talent fails in the big lights and then settles down and flourishes on an up and coming team. Why cant that happen here. Of course id like to have javy back(or at least have gotten a proven stud in exchange) BUT its not too far fetched to believe he will excel in a braves uni.
bluelg - February 24, 2010
agreed
I’m glad the Tiger fans are happy, I’m happy he’s there too.
bighop - February 24, 2010
2nd reply fail in 20 minutes....sorry
bighop - February 24, 2010
you cant sit with us at lunch anymore.
Scott Coleman - February 24, 2010
outcast
No soup for me
bighop - February 24, 2010
shunned forevermore.
fandave - February 24, 2010
alone
alone like a stone in the new world
bighop - February 24, 2010
With Diory Hernandez out ...
What is the back-up plan at SS?
I know Omar Infante would fill in for a game here or there, or even for few days. Is the same also true for Joe Thurston?
But If Yunel goes down and has be placed on the DL, is Brandon Hicks going to be ready to play SS in the MLs on an everyday basis?
And after Hicks, who would be next in line on the SS depth chart?
fandave - February 24, 2010
Hicks can already play SS in the MLB on an everyday basis, his glove is that good. His bat is the question right now. He has good offensive potential but there is serious doubt that he can reach that potential. After him i don’t know who would be the backup,but my guess would be we would have to pull off a trade or sign a FA
yondaime4 - February 24, 2010
this season, will you again be doing the daily review of our minor leauge teams’ games? you did a great job with it, so I’m hoping the answer is a Yes.
fandave - February 24, 2010
they were great
That was always my favorite thing to check out. It made following the farm really easy. I hope it continues.
bighop - February 24, 2010
ya, those are great
while looking around other SBN Baseball blogs, I can say that Talking Chop has the best coverage of minor league prospects. Just for fun, I looked at all the NL East teams blogs; only the Mets had a fanshot up on BA’s top-100 list and it wasn’t there on the Phillies, Marlins or Nats sites.
Keep up the good work!
Scott Coleman - February 24, 2010
Well, it is understandable that the Phillies and Nats don’t know what a prospect list is. Having said that, the Marlins have no excuses.
justincredubil02 - February 24, 2010
lol
but when you have the #2 prospect in all of baseball, you gotta figure they’d at least make a note of it, right?
Scott Coleman - February 24, 2010
I was checking out the Marlins site today...
and it has had no activity since Sunday. I could never imagine 3 days going by on Talking Chop with nothing going on.
dunnytwogloves - February 24, 2010
Gondeee sent me some stats a little while ago and the Marlins site gets something like 70 original veiws a day. Compare that to TC which was getting something like 7 thousand and you get a real idea of how impassionate the Marlin’s online fanbase it. Makes sense, there’s nobody living in Florida under the age of 68.
cbwilk - February 25, 2010
You're telling me
When filling out my links for my weekend story, the Marlins are the absolute worst. I thought I found a pretty decent network of blogs and sites to peruse for Marlins links, and they are simply the most uninteresting team in baseball. They have no real beat writers, no fans, and no good stories. A ton of fluff pieces, and one very sabermetric fan who does a lot of passionate writing about the Marlins, but are largely uninteresting to even the biggest statheads.
royhobbs - February 25, 2010
maybe they have it .....
and a few world series to show for shitty fan support, no attendance, no(verry few) big name acquisitions, handful of coaching changes, blah blah blah……
bluelg - February 25, 2010
So, he's like Diory anyway?...
Mr. Sanchez - February 24, 2010
bu Diory has no where near the potentail…so comparing the two is ludicrous…
Swo12bv - February 24, 2010
Was joking,...
but thanks.
Mr. Sanchez - February 25, 2010
well then um ya
Swo12bv - February 25, 2010
No, this is Ludacris:
justincredubil02 - February 25, 2010
"potential"...
a great word meaning, hasn’t done s**t yet. Hicks has the ability to do more at the place, but until that ability turns into production, the comparison is quite apt imo. But the statement was meant in jest, although the premise behind it remains true (at this point, they can field well enough to play SS, but not make enough contact to produce effectively at the plate).
Mr. Sanchez - February 25, 2010
mitch jones!
I am a fan, the man has something to play for, and he’s ready…I am thinking thurston or jones for their bats, and Jones’ is clearly better, in the minors, majors, for power, and obp. We have plenty versatility for position players (besides shortstop, and if there is ever need for more than a spot start from infante, the roster will be adjusted). What’s more, I don’t think the other two are ready to be pinch hitters, and lets be honest, whoever gets the nod at this final spot is not going to be playing much defense (unless their bat is so hot they work their way up the depth chart, which only jones might do). The guy can hit homers, hit for a decent average, and will only improve at taking walks in the pinch hit position
willlinn - February 24, 2010
Is it me...
or do a lot of people really wanna see what Matt Young can do in the Majors?
Scott Coleman - February 24, 2010
I can only speak for myself (and often spectacularly fail at even that), but I most definitely would like to see what Matt Young can do in the majors, instead of more of what Gregor Blanco can do.
fandave - February 24, 2010
I feel like we’d have nothing to lose by giving Matty Young a chance. We’ve all seen what Blanco can do…which isn’t much. For not having any power, he’s not very fast and he’s not a fantastic fielder. His plate discipline is OK, but when you can’t hit anything besides a single, it doesn’t really matter.
Scott Coleman - February 24, 2010
It's settled
We’ll bring him up in Sept. Maybe not settled, actually, but I hope he gets a chance.
bighop - February 24, 2010
It's not just you...
I think a lot around here are wondering if he can be that 4th/5th OF next year and going forward.
Mr. Sanchez - February 24, 2010
I want Matt Young/Brooks Conrad on the team. I’ve seen what Brooksie can do and I like it. Never seen Matt, but he’s the kinda scrapper you want on your team.
Sparhawk - February 24, 2010
please don’t use the word Scrapper or any deviation on this forum….we all agree Matt Young is awesome…but lets use actual factual basis for describing him…he steals bases efficiently, he is so short you can carry him around in your pocket, he has great plate discipline. he plays pretty solid defense at all three OF positions and can play 2B…see these are the types of things that are acceptable descriptions of Matt…but never scrappy or professional
Swo12bv - February 24, 2010
I gotta be honest, I know there’s no line on the stat sheet for scrappiness, but I do think it’s an important thing, especially in baseball. There are a ton of guys who based on talent alone never should have made it out of A ball, but because of their scrappiness ended up in the bigs. And maybe very few of them became stars, but hey, if they were stars they probably wouldn’t be a scrappy.
cbwilk - February 25, 2010
I've learned
Since I started on TC a couple of months ago, I’ve learned why Wins and ERA are not as good a parameter for judging a pitcher. WHIP and BAA tell you more. Batting average is less informative than OB% and OPS. I’m trying to understand WAR, UZR and UZR150, I read the entire Sabrelibrary posted as a fanshot earlier tonight. I check fangraphs instead of Yahoo Sports for stats. I’m nearly 50 yrs old, learning all this new stuff is very different and often confusing. I hope Swo12bv was using the sarcasm font when he said don’t say “scrappy”. That’s a little to “Hitler-esque” for me. Scrappy is a great descriptive of a ball player. Not to mention the name of my favorite college bar at UT Chatt, “Scrappy’s”, named for a legendary football coach who was…Scrappy Moore
bighop - February 25, 2010
I’ve learned a ton about all that stuff too, most of which I didn’t realize until I got on TC a few years ago. But no, he was probably being serious, they tend to look down on scrappiness around here. Apparently David Eckstein wasn’t cool enough.
cbwilk - February 25, 2010
That’s really kind of sad. There’s a joy to baseball, you read it here everyday. Turning away from that part of the game is a mistake in my opinion. Putting limits on what can and cannot be said as a descriptive bugs me.
bighop - February 25, 2010
its not that i look down on scrappiness… i just feel theres a better way to say someone is a good ballplyer…scrappy is more of a means of describing how he achieves results and for me thats not necessarily as important as the results themselves, when evaluating a player. Scrappy doesnt do justice to the player in my opinion. He usually has a ton of talent and plays his ass of, we should respect that by actually describing what he does well and not giving him a moniker as scrappy.
And i was kinda of joking about saying scrappy, i was overstating my wishes…it doesnt really bother me that scrappy is used, i understand certain people think it is a valuable description, i just disagree
Swo12bv - February 25, 2010
Scrappy
To me, calling a player “scrappy” is a complement, he’s not going to quit on you no matter the situation in the play, at bat, game, season or career.. It is acceptable to say a player “rakes”, is a “beast”, is “versitile”, is a “journeyman”. Those words describe the player, what he does and how he does it. “Scrappy” is exactly the same. Are we becoming so robotic that if it can’t be measured by Sabernomics it is not to be discussed? “Please don’t use the word scrappy or any deviation of it on this forum.” That’s the line I had a problem with. All that type of “vocabulary limitation/banning” would do is turn this site into a boring regurgitation of stats. Descriptive words are good. I’m glad people use them. It helps visualization of a player or incident.
bighop - February 25, 2010
Agree and disagree
Absolutely agree that “scrappy” is a complement that should be applied to players that fit the David Eckstein category. Their 120% is always fun to watch and it certainly makes them fan favorites. The problem is, at least in most cases, “scrappy” is being mis-used by journalists and others to insinuate this type of player is good. IMO, saying something like – the scrappiness of David Eckstein won that ballgame – can be perfectly accurate if it’s used to describe a game in which he did well. BUT, saying something like – The Cardinals need the scrappiness of David Eckstein to help their playoff aspirations – is simply hogwash. The fact is DE just isn’t very good. It’s perfectly understandable for someone to watch this type of player and assume he is good because of the effort he puts into the game. The problem is, if you look at it subjectively, the evidence just doesn’t support it. This has nothing to do with Sabermetrics, simple every day stats support this argument.
Do I enjoy watching DE bust his ass all over the field? ABSOLUTELY! Does his hustle inspire other players to give a little more? I believe it does. Does this make him a good ball-player? No. The simple fact is, he has to give 120% just to be league average. If he is used as an everyday player then he is going to cost your team in the long run. Now, having said that, using him in a utility role to spot start, pinch-run, or as a late inning defensive replacement is perfectly fine in my book. Using the term “scrappy” to define him as exciting to watch is also perfectly fine, just don’t try to tell me that “scrappiness” is more useful to a team than actual talent.
scstrato - February 25, 2010
completely agree
You make a great point, words get used incorrectly very often. That’s not the issue I have with “scrappy”. Maybe others do. I agree with your final line – just don’t try to tell me that “scrappiness” is more useful….." My entire point was – just don’t tell me not to say “scrappy”. That is an ignorant, book-burning mentality that I cannot accept.
bighop - February 25, 2010
i admitted i was speakign in hyperbole when i said don’t use scrappy…so id appreciate it if u didnt compare me to tan ignorant book burner
Swo12bv - February 25, 2010
ok
Sorry, my “ignorant, book-burning mentality” comment was certainly out-of-line.
Please understand, this is a premium site in my opinion. If I post an old-time, basic stat, wins, ERA, BA, etc, I’m going to get grilled, stuffed and ridiculed. For a month, I’ve been trying to get up to speed on Sabermetrics. The original “don’t say scrappy on this forum” comment was overload to my pea-sized brain.
bighop - February 25, 2010
what i think is important to remember is that old time basic stats arent obsolete…they have their place next to newer stats…and all stats must be taken in stride with scouting reports and personal observation (there are things that don’t translate except for on the field). and obviously “scrappy” is one of those personal observations, i just feel it is denigrating the individual, but understand others may have a more positive outlook on the word
all in all..it’s all good
Swo12bv - February 25, 2010
No, no
Sorry CB, but you’ve got it all wrong. It’s not that we do not like David Eckstein, it’s that we don’t believe he is as good as Joe Morgan thinks he is!
In all seriousness, it’s not that guys who play with grit aren’t very important to a team. It’s more about the “writers” who finally write about them making them seem like they’re Albert F’in Pujols.
This article here should help!
scstrato - February 25, 2010
I get that it’s annoying, but you have to look at it from the general perspective as far as the sports “journalism” goes. Most folk, perhaps rightly so, think baseball is boring, so you have to do what you have to do to sell it. Personally I think one of the great things about baseball is that you don’t have to be a frea of nature lie you do in basketball or football. A guy who’s actually smaller than average can compete and hold his own on the same field as a guy like Jason Heyward (hasn’t happened yet but you get my point). And if you’re trying to sell the game, which you pretty much have to, that’s a good selling point.
cbwilk - February 25, 2010
I absolutely love watching guys like Eckstein, Miles and Rowand. The game is more fun to watch because of them. It’s one thing to “sell” these players as fun to watch, but it’s a whole other deal to try and “sell” them as stars!
scstrato - February 25, 2010
True, but that’s really getting into a larger discussion about media and spectacle and all.
cbwilk - February 25, 2010
Agreed.
scstrato - February 25, 2010
Also, if a guy like Joe Maddon says ‘even if he goes 0-4 he still helps you" I think he knows what he’s talking about. Again, statheads can rattle their cages all day long, but if a guy who’s made his living, very successfully, in baseball thinks it, there’s a better than average chance he’s right.
cbwilk - February 25, 2010
Wow
I have to say that, for the most part, you’ve always had very good points of view even when you take a hard line against certain topics. This, however, is the most ridiculous thing I’ve ever read and it surprises me coming from you.
Not unlike Bobby Cox, or most other good managers, Joe’s goal with that statement was to try and “spur” DE on. He knew that statement was going to be printed and he knew Eckstein would see it. Hopefully it would show him he still had faith and sometimes that’s what a player needs. It’s one thing to do it in an office, but to see it in print can have deeper meaning especially to a player. You, of all people here, should know this. I mean what was Joe going to say, “Yeah, he really sucked today”…
Now, if you go to ANY manager, or former manager for that matter, and you asked them one on one if a player helped his team win by going 0 for 4 and making two errors, no matter if that player is the almighty Albert Pujols, and he will laugh you right out of the building.
scstrato - February 25, 2010
I didn’t realize he made two errors that day, so that colors the statement some. But, still, I agree, when you’re talking about scrappy guys, they can help the team even when they go 0-4, heck, even when they make 2 errors. Baseball, no matter how impassionate it seems sometimes, is an emotional game, and gritty gamers can effect the guys around them. I don’t know Joe Maddon at all, never met the guy, but I don’t think he said that as some kind of media BS meant to make Eck feel better, he said it cause he believes it.
As to the last statement, you removed all the context out of the question, so yeah, if you did that you’d get laughed out, if you actually kept the context of who the player is, things might be different. If I’m Pujols’ teammate and I see he’s struggling I might pick my game up and figure I better save his ass like he’s saved my ass a million times. I know some literal minded jackass (not you scstato, you know the right way to have a conversation) will come along and say some nonsense about ’shouldn’t he already have been giving his all, why would what another guy is doing affect him?’ but that’s just how life works. The reality is, the game isn’t played on a stat sheet, so yes, anybody going 0-4 with 2 errors can have an effect on the game, even if it can’t really be measured.
cbwilk - February 25, 2010
its a hard thing to imagine that players wouldn’t be giving it everything they have, but in reality i think it happens a lot more than realized, which is sad to a certain respect, but its overly optimistic to expect a perfect performance everyday
Swo12bv - February 25, 2010
I mean, I know you’ve played competitively at a high level and even when you’re giving your all there’s still an extra level that you can go to. It sounds stupid, but there really is such a thing as giving 110%.
cbwilk - February 25, 2010
i guess the pessimist in me would just say theres no 110 % (mostly cause its impossible) and you’re just operating at 90% when you think you’re giving your all. but thats really just semantics…so we’ll leave it alone for now
Swo12bv - February 25, 2010
I DISAGREE!
cbwilk - February 25, 2010
RABBLE RABBLE YOUR WRONG>>>RABBLE RABBLE RACIAL SLUR RABBLE
Swo12bv - February 25, 2010
my bad
!!!!!!!!!
Swo12bv - February 25, 2010
I appreciate the explanation, I can at least see your point now. I think the problem here is that I couldn’t deduce from your statement that you were considering intangibles, so I focused exclusively on his performance. I am not so much of a stat geek that I can’t see where intangibles has some role in today’s game, though we would probably disagree on the extent of their value, but sometimes, not unlike many others, I have a hard time removing the blinders.
scstrato - February 26, 2010
Word.
cbwilk - February 26, 2010
gritty?
fandave - February 25, 2010
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Talking Chop to post a comment.