Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Wednesday, August 29, 2012

Joe Mauer placed on trade waivers, Boston unlikely to claim him

So with that disclaimer, the Twins have put Joe Mauer on trade waivers, Ken Rosenthal of FoxSports.com reports.

Mauer, 29, has roughly $142.5 left on his contract, which is a healthy bit of change. It would take a team with a lot of payroll flexibility to take on the Minnesota catcher. Know any team that may have cleared say, $260 million or so, recently?

Rosenthal cites a source “with knowledge of the club’s thinking” as saying Boston is “unlikely” to take on Mauer’s contract.

If you haven’t noticed—and it’s possible because the Twins have been so bad—Mauer is having another good season for the Twins, even if it appears he’ll never put up the power numbers that he did in his MVP year of 2009. Mauer’s hitting .309/.403/.425 with eight home runs this season and if he went to Boston, he could serve in the Victor Martinez role as a DH, first baseman and sometimes catcher.

Thanks to HLB.

Repoz Posted: August 29, 2012 at 09:16 AM | 147 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: twins

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 2 of 2 pages  < 1 2
   101. Poulanc Posted: August 29, 2012 at 03:29 PM (#4221512)
But in general there is a benefit for the team to do so: fewer games with a backup catcher in the lineup.


In general, I'd agree. But in the Twins specific case, the backup catcher is in the lineup anyway.
   102. dave h Posted: August 29, 2012 at 03:33 PM (#4221516)
Ray, you think Mauer is a 130 OPS+ player. How much do you think a 130 OPS+ hitter who plays half his games at catcher is worth? Basically, what is his 2012 worth, as a baseline?
   103. Nasty Nate Posted: August 29, 2012 at 03:35 PM (#4221519)
But in general there is a benefit for the team to do so: fewer games with a backup catcher in the lineup.




In general, I'd agree. But in the Twins specific case, the backup catcher is in the lineup anyway.


Mauer has started about 30 games at DH, and Drew Butera has started about 25 games at C. If Mauer could catch those 25 games instead, the team would have someone else DH who would be a better hitter than Butera.
   104. DL from MN Posted: August 29, 2012 at 03:51 PM (#4221537)
I don't recall anyone saying at the time, "Well, the plan is to play him 75 games at catcher in year 2 if his team is out of it, to save his legs."


Plans change
   105. Poulanc Posted: August 29, 2012 at 03:55 PM (#4221547)
Mauer has started about 30 games at DH, and Drew Butera has started about 25 games at C. If Mauer could catch those 25 games instead, the team would have someone else DH who would be a better hitter than Butera.


There isn't any defending the amount of playing time Drew Butera has received. But the Twins seem determined to give him at bats. Something about handling the pitchers well or whatever.

The issue there isn't that Mauer can't play defense. I honestly believe that Ron Gardenhire thinks that playing Drew Butera at catcher has more value than playing a better hitter at DH.
   106. SoSH U at work Posted: August 29, 2012 at 04:05 PM (#4221560)

I don't recall anyone saying at the time, "Well, the plan is to play him 75 games at catcher in year 2 if his team is out of it, to save his legs."



Plans change

Yeah, I'm not sure their initial plans called for them to be 10 games out by the first week of May.

It's an interesting idea (if this is being done on purpose, and not out of necessity): Since we know catchers break down and lose effectiveness, why not see if you can redistribute the value you get out of Mauer more evenly over the length of the contract, raher than get the bulk of his production up front (when the team looks like it's going to struggle) and see him break down faster?

I have no idea if it will work (or even if that' what they're doing), but it's definitely an intriguing concept.
   107. KT's Pot Arb Posted: August 29, 2012 at 04:07 PM (#4221562)
That is a mindset that fans need to get away from. There's one thing being crippled, and it's not these fat-cats mansion bills. It's peoples enjoyment of baseball,People that see a guy like JD Drew strike-out and go "How much are 'we' paying him??? AUGGHHHH"


I agree with you, but you can't stop water from flowing. Mauer should understand that the fans mindset will never change, when the team loses they will look for a scape-goat, and almost exclusively it's the player with the biggest contract and expectations who is falling short of those expectations.

All the Twins fans screaming that they'd quit going to games if the Twins didn't lock up Mauer will gradually go to fewer and fewer games the Mauer contract helps the organization lock up it's 3rd, 4th and 5th losing seasons in a row.

That old saw is 100% correct, if the GM spends too much listening to fans, they'll soon be sitting with them. It was a dumb contract from the beginning that could only worked out if Joe turned out to be at the high end of the catcher durability curve.
   108. Ray (RDP) Posted: August 29, 2012 at 04:08 PM (#4221566)
Ive not followed the justifications, but "what's the big deal about rotating him?" seems defensible. His absence behind the plate isn't costing the team a chance at the postseason and it may well extend his useful life. I don't know that it's a hell of a lot different from shutting someone down to avoid further injury risk when a team is out of the playoffs. the player could remain in the lineup, and he wasn't offered acontract to be on the DL, but what's the problem with forward planning?


---

So you think the Twins should play Mauer 130 games a year at catcher just to justify the contract? Even if there is no benefit to the team to do so?


I reject the premise of both posts, which is that the playoffs are the be-all and end-all of existence.

Saving his legs for future years once they're out of the playoffs is certainly a valid decision point, but as I noted they've been doing this since the season started.

And no matter the reason for doing it, they're getting less value out of him. Rotating him around has caused them to get fewer good PAs out of the lineup, starting with Drew Butera, but even if for some bizarre reason we want to ignore that as a blind spot despite the fact that it's still hurting the team (The Twins are actually a good team! If everything they do is excused!), they could get better PAs out of the non-Butera hitters if Mauer were able to catch 5 times a week.
   109. Ray (RDP) Posted: August 29, 2012 at 04:12 PM (#4221571)
Plans change


And when they do, one should acknowledge that the fact that they've changed for the worse means that the deal looks worse. People are having a hard time acknowledging that.
   110. KT's Pot Arb Posted: August 29, 2012 at 04:16 PM (#4221579)
Ray, you think Mauer is a 130 OPS+ player. How much do you think a 130 OPS+ hitter who plays half his games at catcher is worth? Basically, what is his 2012 worth, as a baseline?


A Mauer/Lavarnway platoon is probably a 140 OPS+ catcher, based on my entirely unscientific research of BBRef that they have opposite platoon splits and Red Sox fan posts that Lavarnway is TE AWESOMEST PROSPECT EVA!

Seriously though, Ryan did hit 85 HRs in the minors in less than 2k PAs, and put up a .882 OPS (.893 in AAA). Getting both of these guys to hit on their best sides has to be good for something.

Though the question is, what do you do with Mauer against Lefties? His bat is still good, but not great, is he still a valuable first baseman combining a .780 ish OPS with his (presumably superior) defense? If you have a cheap righty mashing first baseman it could work well, until one of them gets hurt .
   111. JJ1986 Posted: August 29, 2012 at 04:17 PM (#4221585)
I think Mauer's value is down right now, but if this helps him to catch 130 games next year or the year after that, then it's still the right decision for the team.
   112. Ray (RDP) Posted: August 29, 2012 at 04:20 PM (#4221586)
Yeah, I'm not sure their initial plans called for them to be 10 games out by the first week of May.


Did their initial plans call for him to be injured in year 1 such that they were forced to use him as a part-time catcher in year 2? Because that's what has happened, and arguing that they should be pleased with this outcome, or that it doesn't devalue his worth or cause the contract to be even more of a concern, is odd.
   113. Ray (RDP) Posted: August 29, 2012 at 04:25 PM (#4221596)
Ray, you think Mauer is a 130 OPS+ player. How much do you think a 130 OPS+ hitter who plays half his games at catcher is worth? Basically, what is his 2012 worth, as a baseline?


A 3 WAR player with 75 games at C and the rest at 1B/DH is not worth $23 million. Ben Zobrist is worth more than this version of Mauer.
   114. Nasty Nate Posted: August 29, 2012 at 04:26 PM (#4221601)
A 3 WAR player with 75 games at C and the rest at 1B/DH is not worth $23 million. Ben Zobrist is worth more than this version of Mauer.


I think he was asking what you think he IS worth, not what he ISN'T...
   115. DL from MN Posted: August 29, 2012 at 04:30 PM (#4221606)
I reject the premise of both posts, which is that the playoffs are the be-all and end-all of existence.


Then you're not playing the same ballgame as Terry Ryan and Ron Gardenhire.

arguing that they should be pleased with this outcome, or that it doesn't devalue his worth or cause the contract to be even more of a concern, is odd


Who the hell argued that the Mauer contract doesn't look as good in hindsight as it did when it was signed? I think it's an overpay but necessary in context. How do you justify letting your franchise player go when the public just gave you a shiny new stadium and your team is a contender, which they were in 2010? Pay him a little more than he's worth (which is probably $18M a season) and market the hell out of him.

Mauer isn't even close to the worst contract on the Twins, let alone baseball. Tsuyoshi Nishioka is $15M down the drain. Justin Morneau has provided almost nothing of value for his extension.
   116. SoSH U at work Posted: August 29, 2012 at 04:39 PM (#4221618)
Did their initial plans call for him to be injured in year 1 such that they were forced to use him as a part-time catcher in year 2? Because that's what has happened, and arguing that they should be pleased with this outcome, or that it doesn't devalue his worth or cause the contract to be even more of a concern, is odd.


Well, if I ever find such a gentleman that argued those things, I'll scold him good.

   117. Ray (RDP) Posted: August 29, 2012 at 04:40 PM (#4221619)
Then you're not playing the same ballgame as Terry Ryan and Ron Gardenhire.


Are the fans? It's not like everyone has stopped going to the games just because they're out of it. They're on pace to draw 2.5 million.

How do you justify letting your franchise player go when the public just gave you a shiny new stadium and your team is a contender, which they were in 2010?


Derek Jeter is a model for this. Cashman said something like "We don't think the player is worth what he's asking. We encourage the player to seek offers from other teams."

Pujols left the Cardinals despite them being contenders. Halladay left the Jays. It happens all the time. Why is Mauer different?
   118. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: August 29, 2012 at 04:41 PM (#4221624)
I think Mauer's value is down right now, but if this helps him to catch 130 games next year or the year after that, then it's still the right decision for the team.

No catcher should catch 130 games. That's too much abuse year-in-year-out. Very few catchers can sustain that for more than 4-5 years, and certainly not after 30.

Mauer's catching should be 100 G's tops, with 40-50 G's btw DH and 1B. Accept it, and get a decent backup C.
   119. Dale Sams Posted: August 29, 2012 at 04:51 PM (#4221638)
That old saw is 100% correct, if the GM spends too much listening to fans, they'll soon be sitting with them


Ben Cherington's office must be huge.
   120. Nasty Nate Posted: August 29, 2012 at 04:54 PM (#4221647)

Derek Jeter is a model for this. Cashman said something like "We don't think the player is worth what he's asking. We encourage the player to seek offers from other teams."


I think Jeter's 10 year deal at a whopping annual salary that Cashman offered in 2001 is more the model for this....
   121. Dale Sams Posted: August 29, 2012 at 04:56 PM (#4221648)
deleted. Cherington hate/time ratio too high.
   122. karlmagnus Posted: August 29, 2012 at 05:02 PM (#4221658)
Cherington's basically there to deal with the media and make the tea. The hate object is spelled L-U-C-C-H-I-N-O
   123. Nasty Nate Posted: August 29, 2012 at 05:03 PM (#4221660)
I don't know what #121 said before the delete but in response to #119 I will say that the times that Cherington did what the fans DIDN'T want, it blew up in his face: (Bard to rotation and Aceves to bullpen; not trading Beckett during offseason; hiring Bobby V).
   124. The Yankee Clapper Posted: August 29, 2012 at 05:18 PM (#4221679)
Mauer would help a lot of teams, and it's pretty hard to put together a consistently winning team without overpaying someone in the mix. I'm hoping the Red Sox make worse use of their money.
   125. Cowboy Popup Posted: August 29, 2012 at 05:22 PM (#4221681)
A 3 WAR player with 75 games at C and the rest at 1B/DH is not worth $23 million. Ben Zobrist is worth more than this version of Mauer.

Mauer is at 3.7 fWAR and counting this year. He was at 5.5 fWAR in 2010.

Of course, BBrefWAR has him at 2.5 WAR (only 6 runs of it is defense). The inconsistencies between the two are irritating.

Mauer is absolutely one of those guys who would hit .350 at Fenway, I'm glad the Sox aren't interested.
   126. KT's Pot Arb Posted: August 29, 2012 at 05:22 PM (#4221682)
Though the question is, what do you do with Mauer against Lefties? His bat is still good, but not great, is he still a valuable first baseman combining a .780 ish OPS with his (presumably superior) defense? If you have a cheap righty mashing first baseman it could work well, until one of them gets hurt .


And the answer is right under our noses. Loney. Yes, Loney.

He isn't as terrible as he's seemed this year. His career OPS+ is 105, and he's rated an excellent defender at first base. Over-all that would still be a sub-par first baseman, but he's also a career .295/.353/.443 hitter against RHP. That's something like a 115 OPS+ and combined with strong defense should make him an above average starter against right handers.

Against LHP, give Mauer most of the starts as a decent bat/good field first baseman while Lavarney crushes lefties. Against RHP, let Mauer crush them from the C spot, while Loney fills the decent bat/good field first basemen role.
   127. KT's Pot Arb Posted: August 29, 2012 at 06:52 PM (#4221763)
The Red Sox just gave away Adrian Gonzales in order to unload two bad contracts, yet Joe Mauer would be far more valuable to them, is a year younger, and only costs $1.5M/year more on the same length deal with presumably no real prospects needed.

Think about it. Mauer has a higher career wOBA than Gonzales, and both are regarded as excellent defenders at first (Mauers UZR is otherworldly due to small sample size). Playing him at first full time should yield similar value to Gonzales, and presumably much less risk of injury and similar games played for both.

Yet Mauer can still catch, and Lavarnway is an excellent platoon partner at the catchers spot for Joe. Joe platooned between the spots should yield far more value than AGon ever could for the Sox.

This makes too much sense for all three parties for it not to happen.
   128. DL from MN Posted: August 29, 2012 at 08:58 PM (#4221827)
They're on pace to draw 2.5 million.


Which is a significant drop in attendance
   129. cercopithecus aethiops Posted: August 29, 2012 at 10:55 PM (#4221898)
If someone said I’ll trade you Joe Mauer, James Loney, another piece and two top #100 prospects for Carl Crawford, Josh Beckett, and Adrian Gonzalez…you’d take it wouldn’t you?


The fact that Mauer is on waivers doesn't mean that you're getting him for the waiver fee.
   130. Fancy Pants Handles lap changes with class Posted: August 30, 2012 at 12:26 AM (#4221970)
If someone said I’ll trade you Joe Mauer, James Loney, another piece and two top #100 prospects for Carl Crawford, Josh Beckett, and Adrian Gonzalez…you’d take it wouldn’t you?

The fact that Mauer is on waivers doesn't mean that you're getting him for the waiver fee.

And even if the Twins were willing to give away Mauer's contract for free, the trade above is still an actual option.

If somebody offers you a fungible middle reliever for Vernon Wells, you'd take it wouldn't you? Doesn't make it a bright idea to trade Mike Napoli for a fungible reliever, after you traded Wells for him.
   131. Voros McCracken of Pinkus Posted: August 30, 2012 at 12:33 AM (#4221972)
I'm of the opinion that Mauer should either be a regular catcher (70 or so games a year at least) or a non-catcher. I think if he becomes a regular first basemen, you should keep him away from behind the plate except in an emergency.

This year is about the minimum I'd want him to catch if he's going to stay back there. There are benefits to him catching, and benefits to him becoming a full-time first baseman. I think the benefits to him being mostly a first baseman and an occasional catcher are minimal compared to those two.
   132. SoSH U at work Posted: August 30, 2012 at 01:45 AM (#4221994)

This year is about the minimum I'd want him to catch if he's going to stay back there. There are benefits to him catching, and benefits to him becoming a full-time first baseman. I think the benefits to him being mostly a first baseman and an occasional catcher are minimal compared to those two.


Just curious, why? Do you think the current set-up limits how much he can improve defensively as a first baseman while still opening him up to the wear and tear a catcher receives? And, if so, is it anything other than a guess?

   133. Voros McCracken of Pinkus Posted: August 30, 2012 at 02:28 AM (#4221999)
And, if so, is it anything other than a guess?

It's an educated guess really. There is some evidence that when players are relieved of the burden of regular catching, their hitting often improves, sometimes remarkably. It's a rigorous position to play at the full season pro level.

So the advantage to Mauer giving it up entirely is the chance of both improved health and improvement with the stick. The advantage to leaving him at catcher is obvious: few teams ever have catchers who can hit like Mauer. But the advantage of the latter mostly disappears if he's only catching 30 games or so a year, but those 30 games could potentially also cut into the advantages of the former.

Now if he's catching 90 or 100 games a year, and then spending 50 more in the field or at DH, then that works I suppose. But reversing those numbers I think makes less sense.
   134. tjm1 Posted: August 30, 2012 at 03:02 AM (#4222002)
Voros - what is the evidence that giving up catching improves a player's hitting? I can think of some guys like Mike Stanley and Carlos Delgado for whom this is true, but I've never heard of anyone studying it systematically.
   135. SoSH U at work Posted: August 30, 2012 at 10:21 AM (#4222202)
So the advantage to Mauer giving it up entirely is the chance of both improved health and improvement with the stick. The advantage to leaving him at catcher is obvious: few teams ever have catchers who can hit like Mauer. But the advantage of the latter mostly disappears if he's only catching 30 games or so a year, but those 30 games could potentially also cut into the advantages of the former.


So you seem to suspect these advantages are either/or, rather than existing on a continuum. I suppose it's possible, but I doubt we really have enough data to know for certain (particularly if you look at catcher types, rather than all catchers).

   136. Ray (RDP) Posted: August 30, 2012 at 10:36 AM (#4222232)
Voros - what is the evidence that giving up catching improves a player's hitting? I can think of some guys like Mike Stanley and Carlos Delgado for whom this is true, but I've never heard of anyone studying it systematically.


I've got the same question -- and mind you I'm not doubting Voros's thesis (or signing on to it). I just think it's a great question and would be interested in seeing some analysis of it. (Ron J, if you're listening, this seems like a question you'd have some insight into.)

The following players come to mind as being relevant to this issue one way or the other.

Cheating off of a b-r list of highest OPS+ since 1961 for players who played at least 200 games at catcher. Eyeballing the list I see:

Torre
VMartinez
Tettleton
Downing
Sweeney
Simmons
Stanley
Fisk
Dalton
Biggio
DNilsson
Leyritz
DSlaught
BHarper (?)
Hatteberg
Surhoff
Inge


   137. GuyM Posted: August 30, 2012 at 12:52 PM (#4222505)
what is the evidence that giving up catching improves a player's hitting?

Tango did a study of this, I think (not sure) in one of the Hardball Times Annuals in the past few years. IIRC, he concluded that catching reduced a player's offensive production on the order of 10 runs a season-- a pretty significant penalty.

An interesting question is whether this is a fixed penalty (say, -10), or is proportional to a player's hitting talent. If it's the latter, then the case for moving great hitters out of the catcher position (if they aren't excellent catchers) becomes a little stronger.

EDIT: Tango's article was in the 2009 Hardball Times Annual.
   138. Voros McCracken of Pinkus Posted: August 30, 2012 at 02:42 PM (#4222741)
So you seem to suspect these advantages are either/or, rather than existing on a continuum. I suppose it's possible, but I doubt we really have enough data to know for certain (particularly if you look at catcher types, rather than all catchers).

Right, but what else can you do at this point but try and make the best decision you can with the information you do have. Just in terms of training and practice, catching is a separate discipline than the rest of the other field positions. Maybe not as dramatically as pitching is, but still the process of preparing to play catcher in the majors _is_ different. Or at least current major league teams treat it as if it is different.

It just doesn't seem like to me a permanent state of in between is likely to be a good thing. A guy who is primarily a catcher but whose bat is so good you want him in the lineup more than a full-time catcher can really work can fill in elsewhere (DH seems ideal) to get him more PAs. He'd still be a catcher, practice as a catcher, train for catching and so forth. But if you reduce that workload down to 30 games or so, now how does he prepare?
   139. SoSH U at work Posted: August 30, 2012 at 02:51 PM (#4222759)

It just doesn't seem like to me a permanent state of in between is likely to be a good thing. A guy who is primarily a catcher but whose bat is so good you want him in the lineup more than a full-time catcher can really work can fill in elsewhere (DH seems ideal) to get him more PAs. He'd still be a catcher, practice as a catcher, train for catching and so forth. But if you reduce that workload down to 30 games or so, now how does he prepare?


I think you're probably right there'd be issues at that level of catching (30 games), but I'm not sure when you're talking about where the Twins are now. They might get a little of the hitting edge that comes from Mauer not playing 130 games at catcher and a little of the positional edge that comes from having a hitter like Joe Mauer behind the dish 70 times a year (and just as important, extending Mauer's shelf life as a useful ballplayer). If nothing else, it would give us a data point, so I'm all for it.

   140. Jose Can Still Seabiscuit Posted: August 30, 2012 at 03:48 PM (#4222859)

It just doesn't seem like to me a permanent state of in between is likely to be a good thing. A guy who is primarily a catcher but whose bat is so good you want him in the lineup more than a full-time catcher can really work can fill in elsewhere (DH seems ideal) to get him more PAs. He'd still be a catcher, practice as a catcher, train for catching and so forth. But if you reduce that workload down to 30 games or so, now how does he prepare?


I think in a situation like this it would probably make sense to have a set up similar to what the Red Sox had with Wakefield/Mirabelli. You at least reduce the need to learn an entire pitching staff is somewhat mitigated. Obviously you've got relievers and day game after night game situations but it's offset somewhat and of course the physical demands are considerably less. In this way he can prepare primarily as a first baseman (or third baseman) but still do the necessary work to be a game caller.

Incidentally, why is first base typically the default position in these discussions? I've always thought catchers moving from behind the plate to a field position would make a lot of sense at third. They typically have good footwork, quick hands and a strong arm, all qualities which help at third base. A move to first eliminates much of the benefit of a strong arm.
   141. Dale Sams Posted: August 30, 2012 at 04:06 PM (#4222880)
I've always thought catchers moving from behind the plate to a field position would make a lot of sense at third. They typically have good footwork, quick hands and a strong arm, all qualities which help at third base. A move to first eliminates much of the benefit of a strong arm.


Johnny Bench: "IKNOWRITE?"
   142. Petunia inquires about ponies Posted: August 30, 2012 at 05:38 PM (#4223006)
He'd still be a catcher, practice as a catcher, train for catching and so forth. But if you reduce that workload down to 30 games or so, now how does he prepare?

SSS but there's a counter-example right in front of us - seems to have worked out fairly well so far this season for Doumit.

I think Voros' idea is most likely correct. But KTPA's plan as outlined in [126] [127] would most likely have Mauer catching in the range of 100-115 or so games per year, and that seems basically ideal in the circumstances.

And I would wholeheartedly endorse that plan for the reasons given. Mauer is just the type of player Boston should be replacing their Dodgers with. I would ship the players acquired from the Dodgers minus Loney and de la Rosa to Minnesota for the right to pay Mauer 94.5% of his salary in a mirror deal to the Boston/LAD blockbuster, maybe throw in a B type Boston prospect as well if that's what it took.
   143. DL from MN Posted: August 30, 2012 at 05:44 PM (#4223010)
I'm sure Mauer could play 3B if moved there everyday but it's easier to occasionally play 1B which requires little additional practice than it is to be able to play 3B as well as keep your skills up at C.
   144. tjm1 Posted: August 30, 2012 at 05:58 PM (#4223019)
Right, but what else can you do at this point but try and make the best decision you can with the information you do have. Just in terms of training and practice, catching is a separate discipline than the rest of the other field positions. Maybe not as dramatically as pitching is, but still the process of preparing to play catcher in the majors _is_ different. Or at least current major league teams treat it as if it is different.


I would have assumed that the difference was that players at other positions don't take foul tips off their fingers and don't have tired legs from squatting all the time, rather than the mental side of it.


Incidentally, why is first base typically the default position in these discussions? I've always thought catchers moving from behind the plate to a field position would make a lot of sense at third. They typically have good footwork, quick hands and a strong arm, all qualities which help at third base. A move to first eliminates much of the benefit of a strong arm.


I don't know that that's true. Look at Ray's list - it's almost an even mix of guys who went to 1B, 3B and corner outfield spots, and there are some like Downing, Leyritz, Surhoff and Tettleton who played a mix of those positions. A few of them went to DH, as well. And then there's Biggio.

A lot of this probably depended on team needs, too. I think a lot of catchers actually don't have great hands - they block balls in the dirt, rather than catching them. At first base, you can knock a ball down and still make the play. At third that doesn't always work. Some of these guys may have also lacked the footspeed to charge bunts effectively.
   145. KT's Pot Arb Posted: August 30, 2012 at 07:48 PM (#4223081)
I forgot that Mauer is getting married to his high school sweetheart (or at least a high school classmate) after the end of the season. I think that puts some sort of crimp into the plan, can't see him wanting to move his new bride to Boston for the summers. Unless Henry and Luccino can charm her... oh it's a lost cause for sure.
   146. Ray (RDP) Posted: August 30, 2012 at 10:27 PM (#4223177)
Harvey: Rickie Weeks went 5-5 today. Up to .222... I recall you pretty adamantly predicting a rebound in BA (which I agreed with).
   147. DL from MN Posted: August 30, 2012 at 10:45 PM (#4223193)
Joe Mauer was upset that his mom was getting questions at the State Fair about him leaving. He's not going anywhere.
Page 2 of 2 pages  < 1 2

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Chicago Joe
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogKorea's Hanwha Eagles have robots for fans who can't attend
(6 - 8:26pm, Jul 23)
Last: cardsfanboy

NewsblogOMNICHATTER 7-23-2014
(16 - 8:24pm, Jul 23)
Last: cardsfanboy

SABR - BBTF ChapterWho's going to SABR??
(71 - 8:21pm, Jul 23)
Last: Howie Menckel

NewsblogOT: The Soccer Thread July, 2014
(355 - 8:21pm, Jul 23)
Last: The Clarence Thomas of BBTF (scott)

Newsblog2015 Competitive Balance Lottery Results
(5 - 8:10pm, Jul 23)
Last: cardsfanboy

NewsblogOTP - July 2014: Republicans Lose To Democrats For Sixth Straight Year In Congressional Baseball Game
(2849 - 8:05pm, Jul 23)
Last: formerly dp

NewsblogCSN: Enough is enough — time to move on from Ryan Howard
(30 - 7:48pm, Jul 23)
Last: the Hugh Jorgan returns

NewsblogJeff Francoeur's Teammates Prank Him, Again
(11 - 7:43pm, Jul 23)
Last: Leroy Kincaid

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 7-23-2014
(18 - 7:31pm, Jul 23)
Last: Eric J can SABER all he wants to

NewsblogCameron Maybin Suspended 25 Games
(13 - 7:30pm, Jul 23)
Last: RMc's desperate, often sordid world

NewsblogGeorge "The Animal" Steele Mangles A Baseball
(127 - 7:19pm, Jul 23)
Last: Tubbs & Minnie Miñoso don't fear Sid Monge

NewsblogAs shifts suppress offense, time has come to consider a rule change
(72 - 7:15pm, Jul 23)
Last: cardsfanboy

NewsblogTony Oliva turns 76; Gardenhire: 'He should be in hall of fame'
(54 - 7:11pm, Jul 23)
Last: Tubbs & Minnie Miñoso don't fear Sid Monge

NewsblogBucs Dugout: Manel: Pirates getting creative with defensive shifts
(3 - 7:11pm, Jul 23)
Last: cardsfanboy

NewsblogGoldman: Eliminating the shift a bandage for a phantom wound
(4 - 6:23pm, Jul 23)
Last: JRVJ

Page rendered in 0.4667 seconds
52 querie(s) executed