Hank Blalock

[dpapo]

Blalock road numbers really make me hesitant about him. Here are a set of numbers, AVG./OBP/SLG/OPS for 3 players over the last 3 years. The first two are road numbers for a couple players, while the last is a current Brewer total stats for the last 3 years.

.244

.296

.373

.669

.236

.275

.431

.706

.248

.337

.351

.688

The third line are the 3 year numbers for Craig Counsell.

The second line are the road numbers for Pedro Feliz for the last 3 years.

The first line are the road numbers for Hank Blalock over the past 3 years.

Basically Craig Counsell has had a higher overall OPS than Hank Blalock has had on the road over the past 3 years. Now, Blalock has had much, much better home numbers, it's not even close. But, I do worry about the radically home and road splits that Blalock has had.

[yoshii8]

Since when is .230/.285/.354 just not good, thats awful, why wouldn't you send Dillon or Rottino out there vs. lefties. I'm not sure I understand the logic of, its not like he can't get a hit once in a while, when you have a lot better options. That makes absolutely no sense to me, if we trade for him, he would have to face only righty's.

 

Thats why I want Rolen, Ethier or LaRoche.

[TooLiveBrew]

Everyone acts like a trained monkey could play the OF.

 

Good grief. The question of moving Braun to LF has only to do with the simple fact that LF is where you can most efficiently hide a terrible fielder. LF is the position where defense has the least impact. End of story. It has so little to do with skills projecting there, etc. Why do you think El Caballo & Adam Dunn play LF?

 

Ask yourself this: would you rather have a terrible fielder at an important defensive position, or the position that has the least impact? In all honesty if Braun is left at 3B in 2008 he could quite easily (and even with a modest improvement) cancel out 75% of his offense again. It's really likely that his O regresses, and adding in him playing a full season at 3B, you could be talking about neutralizing his offensive production entirely.

 

Oh, but yea - it's ridiculous to talk about moving him to a position where you'd avoid that horrible scenario.

 

I have visions of misjudged fly balls and other awkward looking plays..

Yea, me too. It's called the 2007 blooper reel at 3B.

[RyDogg66]

If people are going to insist on spelling his last name Blaylock, then I insist on calling him "Mookie" instead of Hank.

 

If someone can convince me that the defense would be better overall with Mookie at 3b, Braun in LF and Hall in center over Hall at 3b, Braun in LF and Gwynn in CF, then I would have no problem doing that. However, my feeling is that Bill Hall is much more likely to be a better hitter than Blalock in 2008 and beyond and the defense from either at 3b is likely to be a push. Gwynn isnt likely to be better than Mookie, but the increase in defense might make up for some of that, plus, Mookie is living off of some good years in 2004/05 right now and Gwynn might improve a little to make it not that much of an offensive problem.

 

Weeks

Kendall

Braun

Fielder

Hart

Hall

Hardy

Gwynn

 

would be a fine lineup, and better defensively than adding Blalock and removing Gwynn from CF. Plus it wouldnt cost anything in trade. That said, Im open to exploring it.

[naivin]

They have been pretty clear they aren't going to move Hall again anytime soon unless they are forced to. Gwynn doesn't even appear to be on the Brewers radar as far as future is concerned. Those two are pretty much given - you will not see Gwynn in the everyday line-up, and Bill Hall is your starting CFer. They also seem to have a keen understanding of the need to improve defensively and they need to find a way to do that with Bill Hall in CF. So, here we are. Braun to LF is a first step in that process. Finding a 3b who can catch and throw the ball is the next step. 3B and LF are the only positions that are not in stone for next year, and in addition to individual improvement, provide the only opportunity to make the defense better.

[Ennder]

Yeah, i'd be shocked if Hall moves to 3B unless an injury somehow forces a move. They are trying to be fair to him as a player and stop moving him around so much.

 

 

It would be nice to get a safe 3B so Braun moves to LF and doesn't have to worry about moving back to 3B. Most of the options we have discussed have been risky though.

 

Rolen - Shoulder

Crede - Back

Ensberg - slumps

Blalock - injuries

etc

 

I'm not sure it is going to happen.

[Scooter1027]

Everyone acts like a trained monkey could play the OF.

 

Good grief. The question of moving Braun to LF has only to do with the simple fact that LF is where you can most efficiently hide a terrible fielder. LF is the position where defense has the least impact. End of story. It has so little to do with skills projecting there, etc. Why do you think El Caballo & Adam Dunn play LF?

Bingo. Braun might not be a good left fielder either (although I think he has the speed and arm strength to be at least average), but playing a poor left field is much less consequential than a poor third base. If we can upgrade the infield defense with a respectable third baseman (I'm not necessarily sold that Blalock is that guy, though -- those road numbers do scare me), then I think you take your chances on Braun in LF. Even if he is poor out there, it'll hurt less than the hack-fest that was his 2007 at 3B.

[hauser42]

Everyone acts like a trained monkey could play the OF.

 

Good grief. The question of moving Braun to LF has only to do with the simple fact that LF is where you can most efficiently hide a terrible fielder. LF is the position where defense has the least impact. End of story. It has so little to do with skills projecting there, etc. Why do you think El Caballo & Adam Dunn play LF?

Bingo. Braun might not be a good left fielder either (although I think he has the speed and arm strength to be at least average), but playing a poor left field is much less consequential than a poor third base. If we can upgrade the infield defense with a respectable third baseman (I'm not necessarily sold that Blalock is that guy, though -- those road numbers do scare me), then I think you take your chances on Braun in LF. Even if he is poor out there, it'll hurt less than the hack-fest that was his 2007 at 3B.

 

Hey if Braun would suck in LF we would have the same thing as Carlos Lee being out there and he got bashed here for his lack of defense.

[RyDogg66]

Yeah, i'd be shocked if Hall moves to 3B unless an injury somehow forces a move. They are trying to be fair to him as a player and stop moving him around so much.

 

It would be nice to get a safe 3B so Braun moves to LF and doesn't have to worry about moving back to 3B. Most of the options we have discussed have been risky though.

 

Rolen - Shoulder

Crede - Back

Ensberg - slumps

Blalock - injuries

etc

 

I'm not sure it is going to happen.

Yeah, I get what you guys are saying about Bill Hall, but that doesnt mean it makes any sense.

If you look at it logically, it just doesnt add up..

2005-2006 Bill Hall plays 3b, and is at least average defensively - and for those two season above average offensively

2007 the Brewers move Bill Hall to CF, where he is considerably worse defensively, to make room for Ryan Braun at 3b, who is fantastically worse defensively.

After 2007 The Brewers realize that team defense is a big problem in CF and 3b.

Ryan Braun is moved to LF, creating a hole at 3b.

Brewers look at roster, do not see any available 3b in-house, so proceed to trade for 3b who is older, more expensive, not as good offensively (Crede, Blalock) and/or coming off of serious injuries (Crede, Blalock, Rolen) to fill 3b.

Brewers decide that Bill Hall cant play a good CF so they trade him in a package deal because now he is without a position, they most likely get older and crappier (Pierre, Dave Roberts) and not much better defensively (if at all) or offensively than Tony Gwynn Jr., another in-house option.

 

I suppose this is why Im not a major league GM, because I think this is the obvious move to make, and it clearly isnt obvious.

[Patrick425]

Ask yourself this: would you rather have a terrible fielder at an important defensive position, or the position that has the least impact?

Ask yourself this? Why are we moving Braun to OF? To improve the defense at 3B. Right? Is Blalock really that big of an improvement at 3B? I guess that's debatable.

 

Why is everyone talking about C. Lee? If I recall correctly he was not the LF last year, Jenkins was (75% of the time).

Everyone keeps talking about offense. Does anyone remember how putrid the defense was last year? Replacing Braun-Jenkins with Blaylock-Braun only slightly improves the overall defense imho.

 

[Oldcity]

If someone can convince me that the defense would be better overall with Mookie at 3b, Braun in LF and Hall in center over Hall at 3b, Braun in LF and Gwynn in CF, then I would have no problem doing that. However, my feeling is that Bill Hall is much more likely to be a better hitter than Blalock in 2008 and beyond and the defense from either at 3b is likely to be a push. Gwynn isnt likely to be better than Mookie, but the increase in defense might make up for some of that, plus, Mookie is living off of some good years in 2004/05 right now and Gwynn might improve a little to make it not that much of an offensive problem.

Gwynn isn't likely to be better than Blalock offensively? You might want to say Gwynn has no chance of being better than Blalock offensively.

I can't convince you the defense would surely be better with Blalock over Gwynn, but I shouldn't have to convince you that the offense would be much worse under your scenario. Gwynn will be lucky to put up a .650 OPS and you want him starting.

 

[Oldcity]

Ask yourself this? Why are we moving Braun to OF? To improve the defense at 3B. Right? Is Blalock really that big of an improvement at 3B? I guess that's debatable.

 

Yes. He's a gigantic improvement defensively over Braun.

 

[RyDogg66]

Gwynn isn't likely to be better than Blalock offensively? You might want to say Gwynn has no chance of being better than Blalock offensively.

I can't convince you the defense would surely be better with Blalock over Gwynn, but I shouldn't have to convince you that the offense would be much worse under your scenario. Gwynn will be lucky to put up a .650 OPS and you want him starting.

 

A .650 OPS in CF is more acceptable when the alternative is a .750 OPS at 3B, and if the defense in CF is well above average while the defense at 3b is just average, that needs to be taken into consideration as well.

There has to be a formula somewhere, where one could add the .OPS of a Braun(LF)-Hall(3b)-Gwynn(CF) combo and also factor in likely defensive contributions (or liabilities) each would provide at those positions (projected VORP, WARP?) and contrast that with a Braun (LF)-Blalock(3b)-Hall(CF) combo.

 

I guess Braun is a constant, so maybe you eliminate that part of the equation. What I am saying is when defense is considered, along with Blalocks home/road splits, LH/RH splits, and defensive abilities at 3b, combined with Hall's defense in CF, is that a better overall product than having Gwynn, a far superior CF to Hall, and Hall, who is about as good defensively, and IMO, better offensively than Blalock at 3b???

 

 

Blalock's 2005-2007 splits look like:

 

.327/.435/.762 overall

.296/.373/.669 away from home

.267/.347/.614 vs. LHP

 

I shudder to think what his OPS was away from home vs. LHP.

[RobertR]

If the choice is between Hall (3B) + Gwynn (CF) vs. Hall (CF) + Blalock (3B) I don't know how you can possibly argue that the latter isn't potentially much more dynamic offensively. It's not even close.

 

Gwynn's ZIPS projection is .260/.325/.328.

 

Here's the 2007 NL Averages

3B .280/.346/.456

CF .273/.336/.426

 

Gwynn's still significantly below average even with a .040 adjustment for CF.

 

Robert

[RyDogg66]

If the choice is between Hall (3B) + Gwynn (CF) vs. Hall (CF) + Blalock (3B) I don't know how you can possibly argue that the latter isn't potentially much more dynamic offensively. It's not even close.

 

Robert

Im clearly not arguing that. Weve had statistics guys say that 75% of Braun's offensive contribution was eliminated by his awful defense. We've had people on this site and others mention that team defense was a big problem for the pitching staff - namely Capuano and Bush, when Suppan came over via FA, one concern was that he may look like a worse pitcher because our defense is not as good. Arizona and Colorado dont have better pitching staffs than we do but they do have much better defenses. And that was part of their success. So defense has to be taken into account.

 

Just a rough projection for 2008 I would say Hall's OPS will be about .810, Blalock, if he is playing here and not Texas would be about .765, and Gwynn if he played everyday, would be about .660. That is a difference of about .100 OPS between Blalock and Gwynn, however, I am going to go out on a limb and say that we give up more than that many .OPS points defensively by putting Blalock at 3B and Hall in CF. I think Hall is a little better at 3b than Blalock, and Gwynn is a lot better in CF than Hall.

 

[dadofandrew]

As I said last night, Blalock's splits do not make much sense, as TEX has been a neutral park the past two years. I think they will balance out, and actually, Miller Park may suit him.

[sbrylski]

There has to be a formula somewhere, where one could add the .OPS of a Braun(LF)-Hall(3b)-Gwynn(CF) combo and also factor in likely defensive contributions (or liabilities) each would provide at those positions (projected VORP, WARP?) and contrast that with a Braun (LF)-Blalock(3b)-Hall(CF) combo.

 

Here's what I got:

 

Here, using Bill James projections for offensive Runs Created (RC) and Baseball Prospectus' career Rate Fielding Runs Above Average (FRAA) from the players position - you can assume your own expected improvement/decline. Then I projected both stats to 150 games.

 

 POS NAME RC FRAA TOT
3B Hall 82 0 82
CF Gwynn 40 -20 20
Total 122 -20 102

POS NAME RC FRAA TOT
3B Blalock 91 - 3 88
CF Hall 82 -15 67
Total 173 -18 155 

 

I assumed Braun to be similar to Hall's OF transistion, so I used the same -15. I think he could be a little better.

 

The thing that obviously stands out right away is Gwynn's -20 in CF. He's only got a 46 game sample, so I guess it can partially be attributed to that, but he might not be as good as some people think. No matter how good he is out there, he won't be the +54 runs in the field needed to make up the difference. (League leader in CF was +24, I believe.)

 

Obviously these are rough, but I think it shows bringing in a solid 3B is not only better offensively, but defensively too, provided he's about average defensively at 3B.

[RyDogg66]

Great work Sam, that is exactly what I was looking for. A few things that may need to be adjusted might be Blalock's projection outside of Arlington, where he was traditionally performed much, much better than anywhere else, and Gwynn's CF defensive contribution. I would expect Blalock's offensive number to be closer to 80. (-11)

 

Looks like you used different numbers for Braun, probably just by mistake, but take them out as Braun in LF is a constant, and that adds 21 points to the Gwynn equation. (+21)

 

Finally, everything I've heard about Gwynn is that he is a superior defender in CF. I'd give him the benefit of the doubt and adjust his number to 0, which as I interpret it would mean just average. (+20) Those three together make up for 52 points, Gwynn might even post a positive number in the OF, but he would have to a +20 or so to make it close, but it's a lot closer than just assuming Blalock > Gwynn.

 

Perhaps Aaron Rowand is the answer?

[pogokat]

i miss corey koskie...

 

maybe we can get brandon inge for brian wolfe part deux?

[sbrylski]

Looks like you used different numbers for Braun, probably just by mistake, but take them out as Braun in LF is a constant...

 

Oh, whoops. I projected two third basemen in the first comparison. Brain fart. I'll just take Braun out then.

 

And yes, I would also think a +0 to +5 FRAA for Gwynn would be about what to expect. Blalock, though, already has a rather lowish projection, assuming he really is healthy. If you want to lower it, I wouldn't go more than -5.

 

Blalock (83) + Hall (67) = 150

Hall (82) + Gwynn (40) = 142

 

This still rough estimate has us about a win better with Blalock. Is it worth the price? Actually, probably not. Hall could improve in CF though, which would widen the gap.

[RyDogg66]

Scott Rolen seems to be the answer. You keep Gwynn out of the lineup, hope Hall can get to be about average and get a very good defensive 3b.

[TerraceReserved]

Exactly Rydogg. I still have not given up complete hope that a Rolen deal will go down. St. Louis knows what they offered was ridiculous, and as time goes by they might soften up on it.

[sbrylski]

For comparison:

Rolen, 89 RC (Bill James Projections - .367/.475/.842)

Rolen, 25 FRAA (per 150 games, as above charts)

 

So Rolen could be 3 team wins or more better than Hank Blalock. And then you'll pick up about 2 wins by moving Braun to LF. So adding Rolen would be a 5 win move. Nice.

[KCBrewerfan34]

It could be time to re-visit this thread, Cameron to Milwaukee, Hall for Blalock? and it would appear defense and lineup are settled. Still would leave starter pitching surplus, unless 1 goes in a deal, Hall & Capuano for Rolen & prospect, things are getting intersting.

 

In Doug I trust

[endaround]

Why? Hall is better than Blaylock