Escobar Willing to Switch Positions

[strawbossisevil]

X ellence, you mean that it would have been a rIdiculous steal, right? I too am glad that Gaudin hasn´t amounted to much for the Cubs.

[liveforoctober]

According to ESPN and a few of their allies... JJ Hardy is projected to be the best defensive shortstop in baseball this year.

 

http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=4029959&categoryid=2521705

[logan82]

Take BABIP for example... because of how BABIP is used it's biased towards power hitters, because if 2 players hit for exactly the same average but one hits 30 HRs and one hits 2, the guy with 30 will have a more sustainable BABIP because he had 28 more hits removed from the equation so his average is lower.

 

Not sure I would necessarily say bias. The more true outcomes(K/BB/HR) a player has the less his stats are going to be impacted by a change in BABIP. Most players should fall within a certain range of BABIP. I would guess in the .280-.350 range. Gamel, Salome, and Escobr all had really high BABIP's last year. Probably not sustainable for any of them. Salome and Gamel put up around .800 OPS with a normalish BABIP(because there really isn't a "normal" BABIP) in previous years where Escobar was only around .700 OPS with a normalish BABIP. I think that Escobar will carry a higher BABIP through his career than either Salome or Gmel because he has speed so his BABIP won't drop as far.

 

Edit: Forgot to add that players will usually stay within a certain range of BABIP. If Fielder for instance would have a BABIP in the .330 rang one year, we would expect him to have a drop off the next year since he is usually in the .290-.300 range.

 

Gamel and Salome haven't been really picked apart as much because they really didn't have as much of a chance to make the MLB club this year. Not that Escobar does, but trading Hardy to get a pitcher seemed somewhat plausible where trading the players in from of Gamel or Salome didn't. I am sure you would have seen the same things about Gamel or Salome's seasons in 2008. Of course they had around .800 OPS in previous seasons so they both had decent season's before. Of course they would have had their defense picked apart. Then add to that, both are playing behind somewhat average or below average players in some aspect of the game where Escobar is playing behind our best al around player.

 

Next year when the talk switches to Weeks vs. Escobar will be even more interesting. If Weeks plays around average defense while putting up a .370+ OBP and Escobar repeats his 2008 season in AAA, then I think the organization has a really tough choice. If Weeks has bad defense or another OBP in the .340 range, I think Escobar is the starting 2B for a season until Green or Lawrie get the call up.

[TheCrew07]

It's not like Escobar's BABIP last season in Nashville was anywhere near sustainable. If it were I wouldn't really find it I problematic for you to focus on it so much.

TLB you assumed I was talking about Escobar when in fact I wasn't... I grabbed BABIP because it's a fairly popular comparison stat these days. Just about every day there is a blog someplace doing a BABIP comparison between 2 players... BCB's Daily Brew has a pretty good summary of what's being said around the interwebs. It's one of my daily stops while most content is Brewer related, it usually links to interesting discussions elsewhere.

 

I have no problem with people who think the Sabathia move was bold... I simply do not... I feel it was an obvious short term fix and Melvin border line overpaid to make it happen. If the Mets don't collapse how does that move look? Would people's opinions change? I'm not going to evaluate that deal based on the merits of a playoff appearance because I feel skews perception, I'm more interested in total value going both ways and the hole that was left behind.

One fans observations do not out weigh scouts and stats for me.

I don't know anyone that has said Escobar will hit this year... the point is simply that just because a certain metric projects a certain line for a player, it has absolutely nothing to do with said player's readiness. It's one thing to regurgitate the same national opinions, and it's another to make your own. When a player earns a label it tends to stick with him until he proves differently at the MLB level, typically BA's opinion of a prospect is what tends to stick. What about the various scouts who were quoted as saying that Escobar was the best prospect/player on the AA team last year? It must be wrong because it's not the opinion we most often read? I never said Escobar will succeed because I like him, that's just how you've continually spun it. I don't even want to discuss Escobar, I never did, and I'm sick to death of that discussion. The only statement I've made either way regarding him is that I'm pretty comfortable he'd hit a replacement level and that in my opinion he is trending in a positive fashion at the plate. Park and league factore are always moving, the minors are way too fluid to try to pigeon hole with advanced metrics. There's certainly limited value in that kind of analysis, but it's hardly anything I'd hang my hat on. Projection systems are not going to like Escobar because he didn't hit well in BC, he only has a track record of 1.5 years of average to above average offense... which is exactly why I pulled out Hardy's 2004 projection, to show how little projections mean when working with MiLB players.

 

I'm not sure exactly how my arguing for pitching and that Escobar would be an adequate replacement has turned into me saying Escobar will succeed because I said so? I've only stood up for Escobar because he's not nearly as bad offensively and people have made him out to be, I'm much more interested in the rotation than who's playing SS. I realize I don't have the vocabulary or natural attitude to say exactly what I mean in as few words as possible so I try to attack the issue from as many different angles as possible so people get what I'm trying to say and it seems only a couple of people get it. I never wanted to move Hardy because of Escobar, I wanted to move Hardy for the same primary reason I wanted to move Fielder, because they have great value, aren't going to sign long-term, and we need top of the rotation talent. To me all the rest of this dicussion is about inconsequential side issues.

 

I'm not anti sabermetrics, I never have been, there's great value in them, I've just consistently been of the opinion that they are used incorrectly. They are not absolutes like they are spun, and endaround used them as an absolute in the example I quoted, which is why I took issue with it and addressed the comments. Many of you are very good at doing player vs player analysis, but that's not what I've been posting opinions about, I've been posting about the best way to build a team.

I don't see how you can honestly make that claim, unless you just really don't pay attention to most of the discussions here (which I personally don't think is the case)

That's fair, you're entitled to your opinion. I would counter that you just don't catch it because you lean that way yourself. There are people that routinely try to apply sabermetrics to the minors and it just doesn't work that way. Raw athleticism, bat speeds, tools... all matter as much as the results. The minors are about development... some guys will perform at every level, some will suddenly have that light go on for them. That's what makes following the minors so much for me personally... the rooting for a player, hoping for a player, then suddenly the light goes and their natural talent starts to take over and shine through. Go back and read through the various threads on this topic, it's the same arguments about BABIP, MLEs, and projections every single time. Cold statistical analysis has it's place, but what is it grounded upon when it comes to the minors? This time last year one of the people I'm countering here said that Salome would have washed out already if he wasn't a catcher because he didn't hit enough and was too short. It's way too easy to play the "statistical" card in a disagreement because it's en vogue these days, any comment based on observation is slammed from the sabermetric mountain top on high. People can't even say X has been bad over his Y appearances without the sample size card coming out in full force, when the sample size was actually the point of the orgininal comment.

 

There is value on both sides, unfortunately that idea seems to have gotten lost along the way. I don't feel it's a disservice to the truth to claim that either poster I challenged on this issue routinely dismisses anything other than statistical evidence. It's just way too easy to shoot holes in an opinion when someone bases it on something he/she observed. I believe that those who expect people to keep an open mind when it comes to statistical analysis should do the same for the other side of baseball because there has been spot on analysis that wasn't statistical in nature on this forum as well. For example, the various conversations about Weeks have highlighted this both ways.

 

My point is and has always been very simple, when it comes to the minors and player development the grey areas of observation, opinion, scouting, desire, mental aptitude for the game, poise,and commitment are as important as the results. If you read my opinions on various prospects I'm all over the place, some guys I like because they perform but aren't toolsy, some guys I like because they have potential, and others because they have the tools and get results. Some how the diffcult to quantify has become dirty, I refuse to accept that as truth, because the grey area is what separates the performance of equally physically gifted players from one another. I honestly believe that the farther away we are from sports in general, the easier it is to believe that the unquantifiable has neglible impact on the athlete, and experience has taught me to personally believe the contrary.

[Ennder]

If I'm remembering correctly Escobar had a lot of bunt hits last year, that would result in a high BABIP if his success rate at it was very high. Fast groundball hitters tend to sustain better BABIP as well. Slow HR hitters tend to have lower than average BABIP since flyballs have the lowest BABIP of any outcome and they have low value from their groundballs as well.

[TooLiveBrew]

There is value on both sides, unfortunately that idea seems to have gotten lost along the way

 

I think this is grossly overstated. Again, I just don't see much evidence to back up this claim. And it's not like whichever poster you're talking about was/is the only person to be skeptical of Salome's value if he can't stick behind the plate. Clearly saying he'd be "washed out already" is overstating things, but I just honestly have no idea where you're finding this loss of balance (Master Crew07 http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/wink.gif)

 

 

EDIT: It's way too easy to play the "statistical" card in a disagreement because it's en vogue these days, any comment based on observation is slammed from the sabermetric mountain top on high.

 

This is where I feel your argument is lazy. What seems too easy to me is to point to some unidentifiable & basically intangible foe. I don't think it's my own personal bias at play to disagree 100% with you that this person or these people exist(s) at BF.net, because they just don't to the degree you cite here. I mean, why shouldn't people have questions about Escobar's offense? Every single scouting report I've read on him does. There's just no way to know what to reasonably expect from Alcides at the plate in 2009, and quite frankly I think people should be critical as to whether or not prospects are ready. Hardy had service time wasted because the Brewers weren't cautious enough with him -- I sure don't want to see the same thing happen with Esco.

[hauser42]

Escobar might have more range and an arm like Hardy but the first issue will he have the stick that Hardy doesn. Second issue is Escobar will not stay in Milwaukee for an extended period of time, Boras is his agent. His agent will get him to a bigger market if he is even close to playing to the pub he is getting.

 

Escobar to me would be the guy I ship out in a major deal to get a missing piece at the trade deadline or an offseason deal for a SP. His value is high as no team has seen what flaws he will have at the big league level.

 

Weeks keeps hitting lik he is and there will be one less infeild spot to worry about.

[cwolf2012]

Escobar does not fit in any place but SS. He could MAYBE fit at 2B, but his bat would need to get better. Regardless, there is no reason to think that Rickie won't be a more productive hitter, even with a .240 average. We can talk about "what-if"'s all we want, but you can't say that Escobar could be a .300 hitter this year, and not talk about how Rickie could easily carry a .370 OBP (or higher if we're talking about high-end projections).

 

If Escobar hits .300, his OBP will still not crack .350, and his SLG will not be much above .400 and most likely below that. If Rickie hits at the high end of his possibilities, we're looking at a .380 OBP and a >=.450 or so SLG. Escobar's glove would have to do a LOT to fill that hole, and we would not have anywhere for Rickie.

 

I don't want to come off as condescending, but it's absurd to put Escobar at anywhere but SS at AAA this year, certainly for the first half of the season. The guy is ++ defense at SS, and could feasibly carry a league average OPS at that position. At 2B, he'll be a +1/2+ defender with a below average OPS, and end up being at best equivalent to Rickie.

 

I do respect him for the statement that he's willing to switch positions, but there's absolutely no reason to. Keep JJ and Rickie for now, and reevaluate at the trade deadline/offseason.

 

We really, really need Rickie's OBP this season.

[logan82]

SS and 2B are pretty comparable for offensive production. I think .718 vs .747 off the top of my head and the SS position is really dragged down by the AL. If you look only at NL they are much closer. Considering that SS and 2B are also pretty close in the defensive spectrum, he wouldn't hurt his value much playing 2B and could easily slide back over when JJ leaves. Nothing really has to be decided for 2 years.

 

Edit: NL is .746 vs .738.

[DHonks]

Really this debate comes down to the direction of the Brewers. As of now, the Brewers have some cost certainty with Braun for a number of years. We know they want to lock up Gallardo long-term. If they also target Parra and Hart, that would give them a core of 4 players signed long-term. Assuming they move Fielder at some point, they could probably consider locking up Hardy and/or Weeks. In that case, Escobar is expendable down the road. If they opt to continue to build around Fielder, they can't afford Hardy and it's an easy decision.

[TooLiveBrew]

I really, really hope Weeks blows up & justifies an extension. But what I expect is for him to be here through at least 2009 & if Escobar forces Melvin's hand, so be it.

[DHonks]

2) Cain will be in AA this year. At best we'd be looking at Cain in CF at the end of the 2010 season. Frankly, if you have a solid offensive player and a player loaded with potential in AA, you don't base the big-leaguers position on the guy that is more likely to turn into Alex Escobar than even another Rickie Weeks.

Where have you seen this announced? Cain has been playing with Nashville in spring games, and tearing it up. Cain played 1 1/2 years at a+, and played a 1/2 season at AA. He mashed in the AFL. He's ready for AAA, and will be there in my opinion. He'll outhit hit Escobar too.

X ellence, as expected, Tom Haudricourt today stated, "Center-field prospect Lorenzo Cain, who spent time in the Brewers' camp, has a hamstring strain and probably will stay in extended spring training. Cain is targeted for Class AA Huntsville" in his camp report column. I never expected Cain to start in AAA because the Brewers have almost never skipped prospects past levels. He had a bit of success in AA last year, but is still considered rather raw. That's a far cry from the refined prospect that Hardy was when he almost skipped A and A+. I still expect Cain in AAA around July 4th, in line for a big league job at midseason 2010 at best. Of course, that's once again assuming he continues to thrive in AA and then AAA.

[Never Outhustled]

I still expect Cain in AAA around July 4th, in line for a big league job at midseason 2010 at best

Hart is our only guy that spent a full season in AAA, the rest only spent months there. If Cain plays well, he'll be our CF to open 2010.

 

The talent level in AA and AAA is the same, its just different types of players. I think Cain is in AA because Tyner wouldn't sign here to play in AA.

[endaround]

The talent level is not the same. And Fielder spent very close to a full season in AAA (103 games).

[RightFieldCoder]

I think it has more to do with what we have at the majors. When Fielder went to AAA, we had Overbay blocking his progress up to the show. Fielder had to wait until O was traded. Otherwise he probably would have come up sooner. As of right now, we don't have a CF for the MLB team in 2010. That probably has a large influence over whether Cain is up by then. The fact that we have Hardy is probably what will keep Escobar in AAA. Hardy skipped up quickly because the alternative was another year of Counsell. And Hall's production will influence how quickly Gamel makes it up.

[endaround]

And moving Hardy up early was a terrible mistake.

[logan82]

Thinking back, we probably would have been better off with a year of Hall at SS instead of bringing up Hardy who was hurt most of the previous year.

[endaround]

Not only that, Hardy only played about 60% of the season anyway. He only got 427 PAs. If they would have waited a few months...

[Never Outhustled]

Putting Hardy in the majors to start that season after Hall had a great spring training might have been the worst personel decision Melvin has made with the Brewers.

If Cain earns the CF job to start next season, they'll give it to him. An alternative would be Hart in CF with Braun in RF and Gillespie in LF, or even Gamel in LF. Its hard to tell what the organizations thoughts are of Hart in CF. Macha talked about using Hart their at the start of ST, then never followed through with it.

[hauser42]

Thinking back, we probably would have been better off with a year of Hall at SS instead of bringing up Hardy who was hurt most of the previous year.

It was time for Hardy to be in the bigs. He was and is better defensive player and last two years is showing that he has a better stick than Mr Hall. Very few players come in to the bigs and start mashing or play gold glove D. Melvin did what was best for the player and the teams's present and future that year. He played the best overall player. Spring stats have never won a division, playoff game or World Series.

 

Melvin's worse decision to this day is not moving Bill Hall when he had some value. He has one big year and Brewers should have gotten some value for that season with some solid pitching prospects to build up the farm. Escobar should be moved before teams discover that his bat will be lost in the bigs and he has no value also.

[endaround]

They did start playing the best player which is why Hardy went from a starter to a bench player by mid season. For all the talk of being patient with Hardy, he was sat down frequently starting the end of May.

[hauser42]

They did start playing the best player which is why Hardy went from a starter to a bench player by mid season. For all the talk of being patient with Hardy, he was sat down frequently starting the end of May.

Hall was not and is not the best player. He had a Joe Charbenau season and some fans are still thinking he has that in him again. Hardy got sat down because he was struggling with his bat, his defense was not the issue.

[Ennder]

Bringing Hardy up was dumb regardless, the team wasn't playing for anything that year and he could have used some time to get things straightened out in the minors given his situation. They should have brought him up around the all star break instead, but it isn't some huge deal.

[Never Outhustled]

Melvin's worse decision to this day is not moving Bill Hall when he had some value. He has one big year and Brewers should have gotten some value for that season with some solid pitching prospects to build up the farm.

Hall had 2 seasons that he was worth over $13 million per Fangraphs.

 

Melvin did what was best for the player and the team's present and future that year.

Melvin did neither. Hall was worth $7.7 million more than Hardy that year, and it would have been even more If Hall would have been the opening day starting SS. Had Hardy just spent 3 1/2 weeks in AAA to open the season, we would control his rights 1 year longer, and his salary would be a few million less this year. The move was terrible for the present and future.

 

Spring stats have never won a division, playoff game or World Series.

In this case they foretold of a player who was about to have a breakout season.

 

Escobar should be moved before teams discover that his bat will be lost in the bigs and he has no value also.

Now this idea has some merit Hauser, even though I think Escobar will hit some.

[logan82]

It was time for Hardy to be in the bigs. He was and is better defensive player and last two years is showing that he has a better stick than Mr Hall. Very few players come in to the bigs and start mashing or play gold glove D. Melvin did what was best for the player and the teams's present and future that year.

 

Hardy was hurt for all but 1 - 1 1/2 months the previous year. He may have been defensively ready, but it is 100% obvious that his bat was not. Given that we were not playing for anything and likely to be terrible as a team that year, we basically wasted a whole year of Hardy. I would trade his 2005 season for his 2011 season in a heartbeat.