Note: If you wouldn't say it to someone's face, don't say it here. Comments deleted on a whim.
FYI, you made mention of Mark Sheldon in the Monday entry. He's about to leave the Twins beat. He's off to cover the Reds for MLB.com, returning to the city where he went to college.
I saw your article on Jojima. But something you should consider is that his record in 2005 is much worse than that of previous years. Perhaps it's not like other players from Japan. I think this might make some errors on your projection.
2003 : 182 HIT 34 HR 119 RBI 53 BB 50 SO BA 0.330 OBP 0.399 SLG 0.593 OPS 0.992
2004 : 144 HIT 36 HR 091 RBI 49 BB 45 SO BA 0.338 OBP 0.432 SLG 0.655 OPS 1.087
2005 : 127 HIT 24 HR 057 RBI 33 BB 32 SO BA 0.309 OBP 0.381 SLG 0.557 OPS 0.938
FYI, you made mention of Mark Sheldon in the Monday entry. He's about to leave the Twins beat. He's off to cover the Reds for MLB.com, returning to the city where he went to college.
That's too bad. Sheldon did a very nice job and was always very friendly to the Twins blogosphere.
I saw your article on Jojima. But something you should consider is that his record in 2005 is much worse than that of previous years. Perhaps it's not like other players from Japan. I think this might make some errors on your projection.
Like I said in the article, the projection is nothing more than a "quick-and-dirty" one.
If the twins are going to give up a solid #4 starter(lohse) and a decent lefty reliever (romero) they should be able to get a whole heck of a lot more than a washed up pile of garbage like Lowell. We need some hitters that can still hit now, not someone who used to be good.
And as for Blalock I wouldn't touch him with a ten foot pole, he hits like Nicky Punto outside of Arlington. Also he is another lefty that can't hit his way out of a paper bag when facing LHP, we don't need another one of those(mauer, morneau, ect.)
Michael Cuddyer has a better OPS than Hsnk Blalock from mid-season 2004 through last year. That's not even considering home/away splits. And he gets paid a LOT less. I don't think anyone would suggest that Michael Cuddyer would fetch Liriano or Baker type prospects. This would be an absolutely atrocious move. (As would Lowell for anything more than a spare part - ie, Lohse or Romero, but not both).
We need to get away from this mindset that we need a 3rd baseman. It's not true. We need an outfielder, a DH, and a 2nd baseman. Cuddyer is plenty adequate at 3rd. It will be a lot less costly to leave him there and go after a corner outfielder than it would be to move him to right and go after a 3rd baseman.
Thanks for making me look at the stats. I didn't realize how silly the Blalock trade is until I realized that we already have Michael Cuddyer on our team--having another one (who, as far as I know, doesn't also play 1st, 2nd, and the corner outfield posisions) would be redundant.
I don't think there will be a problem with Jojima's bat as much as there will be with his ability to catch a game. There won't be any communication between him and the pitcher, besides putting a finger down and calling a pitch. A catcher has got to be able to calm the pitcher down, talk to him, etc. Jojima won't be able to do this because there's a big language barrier and he doesn't speak a lick of english.
It'll be interesting to see how he does as a big league catcher. I'm rooting for him, but not exactly optomistic.
I have no actual information about this (and perhaps you do, I'm not sure), but I'm guessing Jojima's inability to speak basic English is overstated. Ichiro! and Hideki Matsui were certainly capable of communicating with teammates upon coming to the US, and there are plenty of catchers in the majors whose first language is not English.
Hideki Matsui were certainly capable of communicating with teammates
Nothing like the international language of Japanese porn to unite a team.
___________
Excellent analysis on Blalock. What are his numbers at the dome?
It seems that the Twins have all but given up on Cuddyer as a 3b. I expect that Cuddy will see more time in rf next year than in the infield (especially with Kubel on the shelf).
He has hit pretty ugly at the Dome, but that's probably due to our pitching as much as anything:
AB: 63
H: 10
R: 2
RBI: 2
HR: 0
AV: .159
It still calls for caution.
Michael Young, on the other hand, at the Dome, is:
AB: 66
H: 20
R: 8
RBI: 10
HR: 4
AV: .303
Let's tell Texas to keep Blalock and send us Michael Young. We'll give them Lohse, Romero, and Punto/Someone else. It'll take care of our SS and Power needs for years to come.
I really don't think 60 odd at-bats spread over multiple seasons are meaningful at all.
I think it's a no-brainer that if given a choice, we'd take Young over Blalock. There is a reason why one is being openly shopped, and the other is considered a franchise cornerstone. Young is going nowhere.
I have no actual information about this (and perhaps you do, I'm not sure), but I'm guessing Jojima's inability to speak basic English is overstated. Ichiro! and Hideki Matsui were certainly capable of communicating with teammates upon coming to the US, and there are plenty of catchers in the majors whose first language is not English.
I don't have any actual information, myself, but the catching position is a lot different than the outfield (in the case of Ichiro and Matsui). Communication, as a catcher, is key with the pitcher. In the case of other catchers in the majors, spanish is MLB's second language.
I don't think communication will be a problem for Johjima, but it will be interesting to see if he continues to "challenges pitchers' manhood." This is his style according to Gary Garland of Japanese Baseball Daily:
http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/
20...ma_in_harg.html
As for how Johjima will hit here, U.S.S. Mariner has the best work on it that I know of:
http://ussmariner.com/?p=3135
They seem to think he could easily fall in Victor Martinez/Varitek terrority.
Even if he didn't speak English enough to communicate, they would set up their signals before the game with a translator or something. Yes, it'd be restricting for the catcher-pitcher huddle now and then, but they can/do communicate mostly by signals.
Just my two cents, but you're completely missing the point on Blalock. If anything he's exactly the player the Twins should be looking to acquire.
1) He's young, just a couple of days removed from his 25th birthday. Meaning his best days are likely in front of him, not behind him.
2) Unlike Mauer or Morneau, he at least has a history of hitting left-handed hitters in the past, posting a respectable .282/.344/.436 line against them in 2004 and showing more power against them in 2005 (albeit while hitting .196)
3) While his home/away splits are horrendous, he's also the kind of lefty pull hitter who could make short work of the baggie and likely improve his numbers as a Twin.
The real shortcoming with Blalock is that he's the anti-Cuddyer at third base, posting a better fielding percentage but letting more balls scoot past him into left field for hits. Cuddyer may improve his accuracy while he gets older, but Blalock isn't likely to improve his range.
Still, this isn't Blalock versus Cuddyer (although that makes for a more interesting arguement). It's an arguement of Blalock versus Lowell/Mueller/Randa. And making the move for the player who's star might be rising is always smarter than making one for a player's who star may be fading.
From a tactical standpoint, it's too many moves in the later genre that gave you the morass that was the late 90s Twins.
2) Unlike Mauer or Morneau, he at least has a history of hitting left-handed hitters in the past, posting a respectable .282/.344/.436 line against them in 2004 and showing more power against them in 2005 (albeit while hitting .196)
The guy hit .196/.229/.356 against lefties this season and has hit .222/.271/.353 against them during his entire career, so I'm not sure how you can say he has a leg up on Mauer or Morneau in that department, especially given that he has a lot more MLB experience.
While his home/away splits are horrendous, he's also the kind of lefty pull hitter who could make short work of the baggie and likely improve his numbers as a Twin.
Couple things. First, he has stunk in the Metrodome, as others have pointed out (I don't think this is significant, but since you brought it up). Beyond that, if he doesn't "improve his numbers as a Twin" he'd be one of the biggest busts in franchise history. So yeah, I'm sure he will (and said as much in today's entry). The point is that he'd have to improve them a HUGE amount to be as valuable as the Twins think.
Still, this isn't Blalock versus Cuddyer (although that makes for a more interesting arguement). It's an arguement of Blalock versus Lowell/Mueller/Randa. And making the move for the player who's star might be rising is always smarter than making one for a player's who star may be fading.
No one is arguing that the Twins would rather have Joe Randa or Mike Lowell than Hank Blalock. Rather, the argument is that guys like Randa and Lowell can be acquired without giving up the sort of top-level talent that getting Blalock would require dealing away.
Any person advocating the Twins trade for Hank Blalock (and thus send Texas some extremely valuable commodities) is doing so while ignoring his extremely obvious faults and the fact that he isn't nearly as valuable as his raw number suggest.
Maybe A-Rod will become a clubhouse cancer and get tired of playing for the Yankees and demand a trade and they will eat his salary. Kind of like TO or Randy Moss.
The guy hit .196/.229/.356 against lefties this season and has hit .222/.271/.353 against them during his entire career, so I'm not sure how you can say he has a leg up on Mauer or Morneau in that department, especially given that he has a lot more MLB experience.
David Ortiz struggled against lefties at the begining of his career. And look at him now. In Mind Game, Epstein points out that one of the things he liked about Ortiz was that there were glimpses that he could do it.
If Blalock's 2004 season isn't a glimpse he can hit lefties, I don't know what is.
Couple things. First, he has stunk in the Metrodome, as others have pointed out (I don't think this is significant, but since you brought it up). Beyond that, if he doesn't "improve his numbers as a Twin" he'd be one of the biggest busts in franchise history. So yeah, I'm sure he will (and said as much in today's entry). The point is that he'd have to improve them a HUGE amount to be as valuable as the Twins think.
I believe you're also the same person that pointed out you can't make much heads or tails out of Blalock's Dome numbers because of sample size. At the same time, the unbalanced schedule has placed most of Blalock's road at-bats in Safeco, Oakland and Anaheim, all pitchers parks. It's hard to say what would happen to Blalock in the Dome. But at the same point, it's rather foolish to overlook the fact the Baggie makes it a good place for lefties to hit.
No one is arguing that the Twins would rather have Joe Randa or Mike Lowell than Hank Blalock. Rather, the argument is that guys like Randa and Lowell can be acquired without giving up the sort of top-level talent that getting Blalock would require dealing away.
It doesn't matter if you could get Randa or Lowell for nothing. If they can't post a .700 OPS, they're of no value to the organization even if they come at no cost. And there's enough reasons in those two player's stories to believe they can't. Plus, your comment above is a far departure from "And as for Blalock I wouldn't touch him with a ten foot pole" as you stated earlier.
Any person advocating the Twins trade for Hank Blalock (and thus send Texas some extremely valuable commodities) is doing so while ignoring his extremely obvious faults and the fact that he isn't nearly as valuable as his raw number suggest.
No doubt Blalock has flaws. He wouldn't be available otherwise He also has a lot of pluses you're being too close-minded to consider. He's also at an age where you'd expect him to improve significantly at the plate over the course of the next couple seasons. All totaled up, he also represents an obvious upgrade at third base. The same thing can't be said about Randa or Lowell. And if you're going to make a move, it should be a step forward, not backwards. It doesn't mean crap if you can get say Lowell for J.C. Romero if it makes the offense take go further in the hole. You're better off biting the bullet and trading for the better player. Or sticking with what you have. And that's the scary thing that hasn't been said about the Twins plans at third base. The idea of trading for Lowell reeks so much of the days when the idea that Terry Steinbach was a step towards playoff contention that it isn't even funny.
And that kind of philisophical regression is what's going to kill the Twins this year.
"He's also at an age where you'd expect him to improve significantly at the plate over the course of the next couple seasons."
--Age does not presuppose improvements to come. It's not a determining factor in the least.
--Further, just because he would be better than Randa, Lowell, Mueller, doesn't mean he's better than any number of other free agents/trades out there.
I think Blalock would be a good addition. But let's keep our eyes open. There's a reason trades don't normally happen until later. Rash trades come back to haunt teams. Time, deliberation, and evalutation are necessary. Certainly there may be, and likely are, better fish in the sea.
Remember, we have decent pitchers (and there are mediocre-at-best infielders we won't have a place for) to trade. And there are teams especially desperate for the former.
I think we can all agree that we'd rather have Blalock in the lineup than, say, Nicky Punto. But it's not that simple.
1) We have a relatively young player at 3rd who has been more productive over the last season and a half than Blalock. And he's still a lot cheaper.
2) There are lots of outfield options to sift through, most of them will be cheaper than Blalock in terms of prospects given up, and in terms of salary.
3) While Blalock could potentially improve the lineup if it means Cuddyer moves to second base, (and if another big deal for an outfielder/DH surfaces), I've seen no indication that the Twins will play Cuddyer at 2nd full-time. So we're still left with Cuddyer in the outfield; Blalock, who has been no more productive than Cuddyer since early 2004, at third; and nothing but hope for a big offensive upgrade from some other newly acquired infielder, like Graffanino or Grudzielanek. So suddenly our hopes of supporting this awesome pitching staff with runs rest on THREE "promising" lefthanded hitters developing consistency, and fulfilling their potential next year.
4) And most importantly, if you deal away Baker or Liriano for Blalock (or anyone else) you've either got to hold on to Lohse, or find someone else to make 30 starts next year. So that puts the pitching staff back.
If Blalock was an improvement at 3rd base, this would be a different story. But right now, we have no indication that he is. He's paid more, and he comes with more hype, but the performance is right there. He simply hasn't produced to match his salary or his reputation. This team CANNOT afford to give up it's only clear strength (young pitching) gambling on potential and reputation. They have to get performance.
Blalock may not necessarily improve. The same holds true for Baker or Liriano. That's the risk that comes with young players. At the same time, old mediocrities almost never improve.
1.Agreed that Cuddyer is a good (though not necessarily better) option at third. The problem is Gardenhire and Ryan, as flawed as their logic is, don't agree with us. And they call the shots.
2. Remember though the team has Stewart, Ford, Kubel and Cuddyer, if they're serious about moving him to the outfield, sitting on corner outfield spots already, The real problem starts with who plays DH. And the Twins should be looking at the load of cheap hitters with upside, Carlos Pena, Austin Kearns, Hee Seop Choi, etc, too fill that spot instead of fading former stars like Piazza regardless of how the infield shakes out.
3. There are better ways to fill out second than Grudzielanek or Graffanino. That kind of move is akin to signing Butch Huskey as your DH. If you want to be GM of a low payroll team, you have to think more fourth dimensionally.
4. How can you improve an offense that was last in scoring to the point of respectability without gambling? Every rumor associated with the Twins this fall has been a gamble. Be it Blalock's potential to break out or Nomar's ability to stay healthy or Piazza's search for some form of the fountain of youth in Florida being sucessful. The thing with gambling though is you have to be smart about it. You don't hit on 16 if the dealer is showing a low card. You don't go all in if you've got a 2 and a 9 non-suited. And the more numbers you cover on the roulette wheel, the better your chances of winning. The same rules apply to gambling on players. A 25-year-old player is far more likely to break out than a 35-year-old one. A 31-year-old player in decline tends to stay that way. And while that 25-year old player may continue to wallow in mediocrity, if you've got a collection of four or five of them, you may well hit the jackpot.
At the same time, Baker and Liriano are just as big of gambles as say Blalock. Gleeman asked what happens if the Twins trade Liriano and/or Baker and Blalock flops. But he didn't bother with the flip-side. What if Blalock slugs .600 and Liriano is facing Tommy John surgery come August? It would seem to me that's far more damning. In the first one you may lose say Liriano for nothing and that's not good , but you still have a young cadre of arms that would make any organization drool and more than enough talent to fill any positions that may arise over the next couple of years. Especially since you already have your ace in Santana. In the second one you lose out on both Liriano and Blalock's upside, but it's not like the Twins have a long line of hitters about to slug .600. There's Morneau and that's about it.
That of course makes the assumption Texas would trade Blalock for Liriano. Judging from their GM's comments about looking for a legit ace, that may be questionable.
In the second one you lose out on both Liriano and Blalock's upside, but it's not like the Twins have a long line of hitters about to slug .600.
Again, almost everything you are saying simply ignores the fact that Blalock has hit like Juan Castro away from Texas during his career. He has slugged .396 on the road (.396!), and suddenly he's someone who is going to slug .600? That's a leap I refuse to make.
The question is, are there other guys out there who are likely to produce as much as Blalock at the plate, who won't cost Liriano or Baker? I think that answer is a clear yes. Blalock is vastly overvalued, both in terms of his salary, and in what the Rangers want for him. Someone like Kearns (who you astutely mentioned) would be cheaper on both ends. Most likely has as much, if not more, offensive upside (OPS+ last season was 99 to Blalock's 94, career of 111 to Blalock's 104).
I suspect a lot of people are infatuated with the name, as some would be with Mike Piazza or Nomar Garciaparra. Hell, I'm positive that's why the Rangers can get away with their ridiculous asking price. But plugging a name into a lineup doesn't get it done. If we're going to gamble on potential, make the smarter gamble.
That's partly because you're being about thick-headed as the Minneapolis sports columnists you like to lambast.
Would Blalock hit like "Juan Castro" if he was traded to Colorado or Houston? I bet you say no, mostly because you know those parks spawn great hitters. Blalock's biggest problem on the road last year was that he hit 4 times fewer home runs than he did at home (20 to 5). But at the same time look where he hit those homeruns in Texas.
http://texas.rangers.mlb.com/NAS...8213&
statType=1
Where it's 407 ft at Arlington, it's 367 ft at the Dome. Where it's 381 ft at Arlington, it's closer to 350 ft at the dome. Do you honestly believe he's going to lose that much power playing 81 games at the Dome?
It's fun to look at stats and tap your finger thinking you have a point. If you want to do serious analysis though, you've got to put those numbers into context more.
I say Dunn is the #1 player we should pursue. He could flip with Ford between RF and DH to give both defensive playing time.
Other than that, let's just stabilize our infield. I say, contrary to most, Keep Juan Castro. We need his defense in a mediocre infield. Put Cuddyer at 2nd. Trade for a good 3B. Float Rodriguez and Punto.around the infield when needed, and for pinch situations. We're an otherwise solid team. Those 2 trades, and corresponding moves, would provide for a very solid Twins team.
10 Visitors Online
Commenting by HaloScan
