Really, the question of how Murphy will do at second base has as much to do with his ability to stay healthy as his fielding prowess. Sent to Triple-A to learn second base in 2010 (again, after playing a different position for all of spring training) a takeout slide in his second game ended his 2010 season. The same thing happened at second base in 2011, with Murphy going from May 10 until August 7 without playing second base, then getting inserted mid-game at the position after injuries had left the Mets short-handed. An inning later, his season was over again.
Atlanta’s Dan Uggla, whose offensive profile is similar to Murphy’s has made a career of fielding just well enough at second base to keep himself in the lineup. He’s made two all-star teams, and is in the second year of a five-year, $62 million contract.
If Murphy can merely field as well as Uggla, he could do as much as Uggla has for himself and his team. If Murphy plays defense like he did last night, it’s possible that he could do a great deal more.
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.
Atlanta’s Dan Uggla, whose offensive profile is similar to Murphy’s
Daniel Murphy is a high contact hitter with doubles power. Dan Uggla is a TTO slugger. Uggla is very durable, while Murphy's twice had his season ended by a knee injury. I don't think the two are very comparable players at all.
This is one of those first week of the season articles, isn't it?
3. PreservedFish
Posted: April 10, 2012 at 02:35 PM (#4102916)
Howard appears to have a different understanding of what an offensive profile is.
4. SoSH U at work
Posted: April 10, 2012 at 02:38 PM (#4102925)
Compared to Fernando Tatis, I suspect Murphy will win a metric #### ton of games with his second-sacker's glove.
5. thetailor
Posted: April 10, 2012 at 02:46 PM (#4102943)
Maybe his offensive profile is similar in that ... it exists, as opposed to other second basemen, who don't have one at all? I'm reaching here.
6. Tripon
Posted: April 10, 2012 at 02:58 PM (#4102968)
I still don't get why the Mets just don't trade Murphy to a team who needs a cheap 3B.
7. zack
Posted: April 10, 2012 at 03:22 PM (#4103019)
Murphy made a very nice stop up the middle to end the top of 9th last night. He also made a completely awkward, Murphy-esque toss to Tejada on the force.
8. HowardMegdal
Posted: April 10, 2012 at 03:43 PM (#4103061)
Daniel Murphy is a high contact hitter with doubles power. Dan Uggla is a TTO slugger. Uggla is very durable, while Murphy's twice had his season ended by a knee injury.
To clarify- they profile as similar in offensive value. No one would argue that they get to that value in the same way. And even the excerpt points out the issue with Murphy's durability.
9. HowardMegdal
Posted: April 10, 2012 at 03:44 PM (#4103064)
Murphy made a very nice stop up the middle to end the top of 9th last night. He also made a completely awkward, Murphy-esque toss to Tejada on the force.
Went back and looked at this again, after seeing your comment. Do you see a different, more graceful way that ball beats the runner? I don't.
10. Bruce Markusen
Posted: April 10, 2012 at 04:13 PM (#4103106)
The Mets really have nothing to lose trying Murphy at second base. It's not like he's blocking the path of some readymade prospect. If he ends up playing the position passably, the Mets have a player. If he can't, then he goes back to being a utility guy.
And oh by the way, Terry Collins has made me a believer. He's a much better manager than I thought he would be.
11. Lassus
Posted: April 10, 2012 at 04:25 PM (#4103123)
Murphy made a very nice stop up the middle to end the top of 9th last night. He also made a completely awkward, Murphy-esque toss to Tejada on the force.
This seems a lot of work to make a great play seem notably less than great.
It is also possible for two things to be simultaneously true: 1.) Daniel Murphy is a quick and intelligent 2nd baseman who will be an asset at the position. 2.) Daniel Murphy has a better-than-average chance to get hurt playing 2nd base due to a lack of grace and experience at the position.
The more Murphy plays, the more #1 goes up and #2 goes down. As the fact that what Bruce says is also true makes Murphy's position at 2nd base eminently logical.
12. formerly dp
Posted: April 10, 2012 at 05:06 PM (#4103172)
It is also possible for two things to be simultaneously true: 1.) Daniel Murphy is a quick and intelligent 2nd baseman who will be an asset at the position. 2.) Daniel Murphy has a better-than-average chance to get hurt playing 2nd base due to a lack of grace and experience at the position.
The more Murphy plays, the more #1 goes up and #2 goes down. As the fact that what Bruce says is also true makes Murphy's position at 2nd base eminently logical.
Very nicely put.
13. zack
Posted: April 10, 2012 at 06:46 PM (#4103237)
Went back and looked at this again, after seeing your comment. Do you see a different, more graceful way that ball beats the runner? I don't.
Sure. The shovel toss. Most quality MI wouldn't even get up off their bellies to make that play. That or stand fully up, instead of half-standing, then throwing your body away from the throw and falling back down.
It was a fine play, it speaks to Murphy's athleticism but also his inexperience. Good range, spastic playmaking.
15. HowardMegdal
Posted: April 10, 2012 at 08:50 PM (#4103450)
Sure. The shovel toss. Most quality MI wouldn't even get up off their bellies to make that play. That or stand fully up, instead of half-standing, then throwing your body away from the throw and falling back down.
It was a fine play, it speaks to Murphy's athleticism but also his inexperience. Good range, spastic playmaking.
Sorry, don't see it the same way. He was out of time. He didn't have the time to stand up, nor should he have done so. He got the ball there effectively.
16. JJ1986
Posted: April 10, 2012 at 08:57 PM (#4103472)
Murphy can also lose games with his glove.
17. Lassus
Posted: April 10, 2012 at 09:14 PM (#4103509)
Wait, WTF happened with Wright's pinky? I've been watching every damned game, this is the first I've heard of it.
You've got to be ####### kidding me.
18. HowardMegdal
Posted: April 10, 2012 at 10:53 PM (#4103607)
Yeah, never mind.
19. Dan
Posted: April 10, 2012 at 10:59 PM (#4103611)
I thought it was interesting that with both Turner and Cedeno in the lineup that Murphy still played 2nd base.
20. Karl from NY
Posted: April 10, 2012 at 11:26 PM (#4103626)
I still don't get why the Mets just don't trade Murphy to a team who needs a cheap 3B.
Because he's going to play 3B in 2013 because they already know they're going to trade Wright or decline his option.
21. tshipman
Posted: April 10, 2012 at 11:37 PM (#4103629)
Daniel Murphy is a high contact hitter with doubles power. Dan Uggla is a TTO slugger. Uggla is very durable, while Murphy's twice had his season ended by a knee injury. I don't think the two are very comparable players at all.
They're almost identical players--just like Sandy Koufax and Oliver Perez.
22. Dan
Posted: April 10, 2012 at 11:40 PM (#4103631)
I'm surprised it took until post #21 for someone to make that allusion.
23. PreservedFish
Posted: April 10, 2012 at 11:51 PM (#4103640)
But the more relevant Tatis reference came in post #4.
24. HowardMegdal
Posted: April 11, 2012 at 01:09 AM (#4103652)
Yes, those defenders of Luis Castillo over Fernando Tatis really made me look bad, what with Castillo's career renaissance. That would be the guy who was about to put up a 68 OPS+ with awful defense, and never play again. Too bad Tatis played hurt until he shut it down- would have been interesting to see how he did out there.
I do think we can say that Perez never reached his best-case scenario from back in 2007, which would have been Koufax. The main point of the piece was that if he controlled his walks even a little, he'd be a league average pitcher, and he was for the next two seasons. The piece actually projected him for 16 wins, 3.5-3.7 ERA in 2007.
Just thought I'd inject the reality of what I argued years ago, if people felt like putting up straw men.
25. tshipman
Posted: April 11, 2012 at 01:21 AM (#4103657)
I do think we can say that Perez never reached his best-case scenario from back in 2007, which would have been Koufax. The main point of the piece was that if he controlled his walks even a little, he'd be a league average pitcher, and he was for the next two seasons. The piece actually projected him for 16 wins, 3.5-3.7 ERA in 2007.
I don't know what made me laugh harder. Megdal doubling down on Oliver Perez having Koufax as his best-case scenario, or that when I went to look up Perez on BBref, Megdal was the sponsor.
26. PreservedFish
Posted: April 11, 2012 at 01:28 AM (#4103659)
Yes, those defenders of Luis Castillo over Fernando Tatis really made me look bad, what with Castillo's career renaissance. That would be the guy who was about to put up a 68 OPS+ with awful defense, and never play again. Too bad Tatis played hurt until he shut it down- would have been interesting to see how he did out there.
Oh, come on. Just eat your crow. You said that Tatis - a guy who was not even an average defender at third base in his 20s - could be "league average defensively" at second, playing the position for the first time, at the age of 35. It was a totally insane statement, and it would have been immediately forgotten by the community had you just admitted that it was totally insane. But you dug your heels in.
And the Koufax/Perez thing is not a strawman, it's just teasing, teasing which you deserve and should be a good sport about.
27. HowardMegdal
Posted: April 11, 2012 at 01:44 AM (#4103663)
Well, this is what I wrote in 2010, in the thread, regarding Tatis/Castillo.
Look, let's take the league average 2B out of it if you want- I've been impressed with Tatis defensively, he handles 3B quite well, 2B adequately, and think he'd be right around average at the position. His defense a decade ago, when Tatis didn't do a lot of things that would make him a good fielder, is a lot less relevant to me. How Ron Santo handled it is pretty irrelevant too.
But we do have a pretty good idea of just how bad Tatis would have to be defensively to be a worse option than Castillo at 2B-and it's shockingly bad. Let's just take a direct comparison, as I did in the piece (mentioned the sensible 1B platoon, too)- Castillo has an OPS+ the last two years of 90. Tatis is at 113. So for Castillo to make that up, Tatis would need to be monumentally worse than Castillo defensively in 2010.
But Castillo, in 2009, was already WAY below average for a defensive 2B. He was the worst everyday 2B, defensively, in baseball. And again, his being a year older is going to work against him- I believe, more than the average player. I think the chances Castillo comes into camp in 2010 in the same shape as 2009, when he had something to prove, are minimal.
To be clear (and I mentioned this in 5 as well), Orlando Hudson and Felipe Lopez are good choices for 2B. Tatis isn't, precisely because my hunch should not be enough to make a decision to allow a 35 year old to play every day at a new position. That there's a reasonable argument to be made that Tatis is a better choice at the position than Castillo isn't an endorsement of Tatis to play every day at 2B. It is an indictment of Castillo.
Meanwhile, you want to keep pretending I said Perez was going to turn into Koufax in an article where I accurately predicted his 2007 production, I'm going to keep pointing out that you are full of it.
28. boteman
Posted: April 11, 2012 at 02:06 AM (#4103668)
Wait, WTF happened with Wright's pinky? I've been watching every damned game, this is the first I've heard of it.
Prediction: Wright is out for the season.
29. PreservedFish
Posted: April 11, 2012 at 02:27 AM (#4103670)
Look, let's take the league average 2B out of it if you want- I've been impressed with Tatis defensively, he handles 3B quite well, 2B adequately, and think he'd be right around average at the position.
Yeah, see, this is where you are totally crazy, and this is the one comment that you got #### for. I mean, to make this point and actually believe it requires one of two things: either your understanding of baseball has some woefully large gaps, or you just made a quick boneheaded comment, as we all do from time to time. It would seem to me easy to admit the latter, but your pigheaded defenses just further convince us of the former.
I understand that you (in the original thread and now) have been trying to steer things away the Tatis=average argument and back towards the larger argument about Castillo's overall quality and whether or not the hitting gap could outweigh the fielding gap. I think you're wrong there too, but the reason nobody has ever really taken you up on this argument is simple ... it's just too fun and easy to mock you for the Tatis=average defender thing.
Meanwhile, you want to keep pretending I said Perez was going to turn into Koufax in an article where I accurately predicted his 2007 production, I'm going to keep pointing out that you are full of it.
Once again, you are being teased. Nobody cares if the teasing is strictly accurate, because it's just teasing. But hell. You were the world's biggest Oliver Perez supporter, you wrote his florid B-R sponsorship, and you still (!) are using Koufax as a reference for the pitcher that you thought Perez was capable of becoming. So you never explicitly said that Oliver Perez was in fact Sandy Koufax? The teasing is accurate enough to be funny.
30. Lassus
Posted: April 11, 2012 at 06:07 AM (#4103686)
Ramming Howard over the Koufax/Perez thing in regards to every new article is ####### petty and tiresome. (Teasing is something else, but that isn't what's happened in this thread.)
Howard has a history, maybe just a minor one, but still a history of getting overly enthusiastic about the potential of certain Mets players that is the basis for the ribbing in this thread. The reason the Perez/Tatis memes are being brought up is that the comparison of Murphy to Uggla after a handful of games at the start of the year seems to fall into that pattern. I'm neutral towards the Mets but Murphy seems like a good guy and an easy player to root for. He really isn't the same kind of hitter as Uggla, though. The guy I think may be a better comp for Murphy may be Howie Kendrick--Kendrick with the better glove, but Murphy with the better on base skills and similar power.
Yes, those defenders of Luis Castillo over Fernando Tatis really made me look bad, what with Castillo's career renaissance. That would be the guy who was about to put up a 68 OPS+ with awful defense, and never play again. Too bad Tatis played hurt until he shut it down- would have been interesting to see how he did out there.
I do think we can say that Perez never reached his best-case scenario from back in 2007, which would have been Koufax. The main point of the piece was that if he controlled his walks even a little, he'd be a league average pitcher, and he was for the next two seasons. The piece actually projected him for 16 wins, 3.5-3.7 ERA in 2007.
Just thought I'd inject the reality of what I argued years ago, if people felt like putting up straw men.
Has Rakoff vacated his opinions and orders yet in Picard v. Sterling?
33. Lassus
Posted: April 11, 2012 at 09:13 AM (#4103732)
#31 - Shooty, I think we're only disagreeing about what's happening. I don't see ribbing or teasing; I see constant, snarky, superior sniping, which is both boring and irritating. Moreso the latter, lately, to me at least.
34. zack
Posted: April 11, 2012 at 09:33 AM (#4103742)
Unlike thread parenting, which is scintillating. The italics are for betchiness.
35. Lassus
Posted: April 11, 2012 at 09:38 AM (#4103743)
Unlike thread parenting, which is scintillating.
#### you. The #s are for derision. I see no parenting. If I disagree with what I see, I'll say so. That's why this place is here. They can say it, I can respond. And then you can be betchily italic. Perfect harmony.
36. JPWF1313
Posted: April 11, 2012 at 10:17 AM (#4103780)
Ramming Howard over the Koufax/Perez thing in regards to every new article is ####### petty and tiresome. (Teasing is something else, but that isn't what's happened in this thread.)
It's kind of like those who can't let Cameron's #6 org and prospect denigration of Cano comments go...
37. Lassus
Posted: April 11, 2012 at 10:27 AM (#4103787)
You know what, I'm a reasonable - if angry - human being. Perhaps thread parenting is the applicable term. I don't care. I am just ####### tired of hearing it in every ############# thread to Howard's articles.
38. PreservedFish
Posted: April 11, 2012 at 10:46 AM (#4103797)
Ramming Howard over the Koufax/Perez thing in regards to every new article is ####### petty and tiresome. (Teasing is something else, but that isn't what's happened in this thread.)
Where's the ramming? tshipman made a cute one-liner, and that was it. But that was enough for Howard to jump in with a full-throated defense and accusations of "strawmen." I think Howard's been able to laugh about the Ollie thing in the past (I like the winking B-R sponsorship that's up now), but in general this is reminiscent of Cameron for another reason: the author's unwillingness to back down has undoubtedly compounded the problem.
It's kind of like those who can't let Cameron's #6 org and prospect denigration of Cano comments go...
The difference here is that unlike Cameron, Howard is right about stuff at least once in a while.
40. JJ1986
Posted: April 11, 2012 at 11:42 AM (#4103854)
I do not see how thinking Tatis is not a league average second baseman makes someone a "defender of Luis Castillo".
41. Lassus
Posted: April 11, 2012 at 11:57 AM (#4103884)
Where's the ramming? tshipman made a cute one-liner, and that was it. But that was enough for Howard to jump in with a full-throated defense and accusations of "strawmen." I think Howard's been able to laugh about the Ollie thing in the past (I like the winking B-R sponsorship that's up now), but in general this is reminiscent of Cameron for another reason: the author's unwillingness to back down has undoubtedly compounded the problem.
I'm willing to be equanimous, seriously. Sure, Howard could just nod and smile every time, I get that. The fact that he still HAS his sponsorship shows he almost always is. But the one I caught was #25 about how hard the laughter was. If you're able with good humor to be teased, kidded, or mocked consistently about one meal you missed the mark on three years ago in the same kitchen in front of everyone you work with without a few \"#### you's", along the way, I'll understand better.
If Dan Murphy took that iron glove of his and beat the opposition with it, that would probably help win games.
43. PreservedFish
Posted: April 11, 2012 at 12:23 PM (#4103926)
Sure, Howard could just nod and smile every time, I get that.
Or he could ignore it. Or he could say, "Hey, stop bothering me." Any of these are reasonable responses.
Howard's doing the one thing that doesn't seem reasonable. He's declaring that he was right about Perez all along. He was right in 2007, when he made a spot-on prediction about Perez. But he's stroking this one feather in his cap while ignoring the many other things he said about Perez that proved spectacularly incorrect. Howard doesn't get mocked just for the Koufax comment but for the general pattern of Ollie man love. It took me about 10 seconds with the search function to find Howard saying that Perez's 2007 "might well be his floor," Howard comparing Perez favorably to Sabathia as a potential signing, Howard pimping Perez (in his "physical prime") as likely to surpass Derek Lowe in value (Perez threw another 46 innings)...
If you're able with good humor to be teased, kidded, or mocked consistently about one meal you missed the mark on three years ago in the same kitchen in front of everyone you work with without a few \"#### you's", along the way, I'll understand better.
I'm sure it would wear thin, and I understand your annoyance with the same topic coming up all the time. But if I had served dogshit I wouldn't still be insisting, years later, that it was delicious.
44. JJ1986
Posted: April 11, 2012 at 12:28 PM (#4103935)
(Perez threw another 46 innings)...
"Boy, Ollie Perez is really terrible."
"I know, and so few innings."
45. Downtown Bookie
Posted: April 11, 2012 at 12:36 PM (#4103944)
So who's going to cost the Mets more runs on defense this year: Murphy at second, or Duda in right?
To clarify- they profile as similar in offensive value. No one would argue that they get to that value in the same way. And even the excerpt points out the issue with Murphy's durability.
To start, thanks for responding. It's always cool to interact with the author, ya ken? Besides, I was probably the second most bullish Ollie Perez backer on Earth back in 07-08. Anywho --
Fair enough wrt durability. I just think it's a big enough difference to be dispositive, though that's mostly a point in favor of Uggla. WRT offensive value, I think that there's a significant enough difference in the way their value is derived that they still can't really be called comparable. I understand that holistic measures may view things differently, but for practical purposes, they really are very, very different players and will be deployed accordingly.
So who's going to cost the Mets more runs on defense this year: Murphy at second, or Duda in right?
DB
I might be nuts, but I think Duda's looked like not-a-total-piece-of-crap out there. My guess is that this point will be largely moot by the second half because I'd bet that either Duda or Murphy will be moved to LF to replace Bay. The Mets have to cut their losses on Bay at some point, and if he's on pace for another 250/15HR season in July, he might as well get released.
47. PreservedFish
Posted: April 11, 2012 at 12:55 PM (#4103983)
I might be nuts, but I think Duda's looked like not-a-total-piece-of-crap out there.
Oooh, I think you're nuts. He's a butcher. Not that I would do anything about it at this point. I like his bat, and he deserves a chance to improve.
Yeah. Duda looks scary out there. I love him and he's defintiely our best option out there, but his routes remind me of the Todd Hundley experiment. Murphy covers his ground at second pretty well. He just lets too many balls bounce off his glove. That seems a lot easier to fix.
50. Lassus
Posted: April 11, 2012 at 02:02 PM (#4104124)
I agree with everyone else on Duda. He looks like he has three left feet out there. I also agree we should live with it, for now at least.
51. thetailor
Posted: April 11, 2012 at 02:08 PM (#4104135)
It's so much harder to LOOK like a horrible outfielder than infielder. So yes, I agree with those that are horrified by Duda's play out there. I also reluctantly join in agreeing they need to run him out there. On the bright side, even though he failed to line it up properly, he made a pretty great throw last night.
Lucas Duda is the answer to the question "What if we put Richie Sexson in right?"
I'm going to next Wednesday's game in Atlanta specifically to see Duda play the field. Hopefully the Braves will start Juan Francisco at 3B and we can have a contest to see who is the worst defender imaginable.
54. HowardMegdal
Posted: April 11, 2012 at 10:57 PM (#4104615)
To start, thanks for responding. It's always cool to interact with the author, ya ken? Besides, I was probably the second most bullish Ollie Perez backer on Earth back in 07-08. Anywho --
Fair enough wrt durability. I just think it's a big enough difference to be dispositive, though that's mostly a point in favor of Uggla. WRT offensive value, I think that there's a significant enough difference in the way their value is derived that they still can't really be called comparable. I understand that holistic measures may view things differently, but for practical purposes, they really are very, very different players and will be deployed accordingly.
FWIW, I don't disagree with you on any of this. I'm just not sure we have a handle on what Murphy's durability at 2B will be like if they just let him play the damn position without jerking him around. So naturally, Terry said today if Wright goes on the DL, he's moving Murphy to 3B.
On the other stuff- I've never hesitated to point out, myself, when I get things wrong. The Perez FA contract- definitely wrong. General optimism about Perez proved wrong- I sponsor him because I find it amusing.
Nor is it the only time I've gotten something wrong. Thought extending Jeter and, before that, giving Posada four years were both major mistakes. I write about baseball every day. I think I get most of it right, but I'll get some things wrong, and I'm happy to own up to them.
What I won't do is browbeat myself until you are satisfied when you tell me I've said something I haven't said. You want to call that unreasonable, fine.
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.
1. Heinie Mantush (Krusty) Posted: April 10, 2012 at 02:31 PM (#4102909)Daniel Murphy is a high contact hitter with doubles power. Dan Uggla is a TTO slugger. Uggla is very durable, while Murphy's twice had his season ended by a knee injury. I don't think the two are very comparable players at all.
To clarify- they profile as similar in offensive value. No one would argue that they get to that value in the same way. And even the excerpt points out the issue with Murphy's durability.
Went back and looked at this again, after seeing your comment. Do you see a different, more graceful way that ball beats the runner? I don't.
And oh by the way, Terry Collins has made me a believer. He's a much better manager than I thought he would be.
This seems a lot of work to make a great play seem notably less than great.
It is also possible for two things to be simultaneously true: 1.) Daniel Murphy is a quick and intelligent 2nd baseman who will be an asset at the position. 2.) Daniel Murphy has a better-than-average chance to get hurt playing 2nd base due to a lack of grace and experience at the position.
The more Murphy plays, the more #1 goes up and #2 goes down. As the fact that what Bruce says is also true makes Murphy's position at 2nd base eminently logical.
The more Murphy plays, the more #1 goes up and #2 goes down. As the fact that what Bruce says is also true makes Murphy's position at 2nd base eminently logical.
Very nicely put.
Sure. The shovel toss. Most quality MI wouldn't even get up off their bellies to make that play. That or stand fully up, instead of half-standing, then throwing your body away from the throw and falling back down.
It was a fine play, it speaks to Murphy's athleticism but also his inexperience. Good range, spastic playmaking.
That's what she said. To me.
It was a fine play, it speaks to Murphy's athleticism but also his inexperience. Good range, spastic playmaking.
Sorry, don't see it the same way. He was out of time. He didn't have the time to stand up, nor should he have done so. He got the ball there effectively.
You've got to be ####### kidding me.
Because he's going to play 3B in 2013 because they already know they're going to trade Wright or decline his option.
They're almost identical players--just like Sandy Koufax and Oliver Perez.
I do think we can say that Perez never reached his best-case scenario from back in 2007, which would have been Koufax. The main point of the piece was that if he controlled his walks even a little, he'd be a league average pitcher, and he was for the next two seasons. The piece actually projected him for 16 wins, 3.5-3.7 ERA in 2007.
Just thought I'd inject the reality of what I argued years ago, if people felt like putting up straw men.
I don't know what made me laugh harder. Megdal doubling down on Oliver Perez having Koufax as his best-case scenario, or that when I went to look up Perez on BBref, Megdal was the sponsor.
Oh, come on. Just eat your crow. You said that Tatis - a guy who was not even an average defender at third base in his 20s - could be "league average defensively" at second, playing the position for the first time, at the age of 35. It was a totally insane statement, and it would have been immediately forgotten by the community had you just admitted that it was totally insane. But you dug your heels in.
And the Koufax/Perez thing is not a strawman, it's just teasing, teasing which you deserve and should be a good sport about.
Look, let's take the league average 2B out of it if you want- I've been impressed with Tatis defensively, he handles 3B quite well, 2B adequately, and think he'd be right around average at the position. His defense a decade ago, when Tatis didn't do a lot of things that would make him a good fielder, is a lot less relevant to me. How Ron Santo handled it is pretty irrelevant too.
But we do have a pretty good idea of just how bad Tatis would have to be defensively to be a worse option than Castillo at 2B-and it's shockingly bad. Let's just take a direct comparison, as I did in the piece (mentioned the sensible 1B platoon, too)- Castillo has an OPS+ the last two years of 90. Tatis is at 113. So for Castillo to make that up, Tatis would need to be monumentally worse than Castillo defensively in 2010.
But Castillo, in 2009, was already WAY below average for a defensive 2B. He was the worst everyday 2B, defensively, in baseball. And again, his being a year older is going to work against him- I believe, more than the average player. I think the chances Castillo comes into camp in 2010 in the same shape as 2009, when he had something to prove, are minimal.
To be clear (and I mentioned this in 5 as well), Orlando Hudson and Felipe Lopez are good choices for 2B. Tatis isn't, precisely because my hunch should not be enough to make a decision to allow a 35 year old to play every day at a new position. That there's a reasonable argument to be made that Tatis is a better choice at the position than Castillo isn't an endorsement of Tatis to play every day at 2B. It is an indictment of Castillo.
Meanwhile, you want to keep pretending I said Perez was going to turn into Koufax in an article where I accurately predicted his 2007 production, I'm going to keep pointing out that you are full of it.
Prediction: Wright is out for the season.
Yeah, see, this is where you are totally crazy, and this is the one comment that you got #### for. I mean, to make this point and actually believe it requires one of two things: either your understanding of baseball has some woefully large gaps, or you just made a quick boneheaded comment, as we all do from time to time. It would seem to me easy to admit the latter, but your pigheaded defenses just further convince us of the former.
I understand that you (in the original thread and now) have been trying to steer things away the Tatis=average argument and back towards the larger argument about Castillo's overall quality and whether or not the hitting gap could outweigh the fielding gap. I think you're wrong there too, but the reason nobody has ever really taken you up on this argument is simple ... it's just too fun and easy to mock you for the Tatis=average defender thing.
Once again, you are being teased. Nobody cares if the teasing is strictly accurate, because it's just teasing. But hell. You were the world's biggest Oliver Perez supporter, you wrote his florid B-R sponsorship, and you still (!) are using Koufax as a reference for the pitcher that you thought Perez was capable of becoming. So you never explicitly said that Oliver Perez was in fact Sandy Koufax? The teasing is accurate enough to be funny.
Has Rakoff vacated his opinions and orders yet in Picard v. Sterling?
#### you. The #s are for derision. I see no parenting. If I disagree with what I see, I'll say so. That's why this place is here. They can say it, I can respond. And then you can be betchily italic. Perfect harmony.
It's kind of like those who can't let Cameron's #6 org and prospect denigration of Cano comments go...
Where's the ramming? tshipman made a cute one-liner, and that was it. But that was enough for Howard to jump in with a full-throated defense and accusations of "strawmen." I think Howard's been able to laugh about the Ollie thing in the past (I like the winking B-R sponsorship that's up now), but in general this is reminiscent of Cameron for another reason: the author's unwillingness to back down has undoubtedly compounded the problem.
The difference here is that unlike Cameron, Howard is right about stuff at least once in a while.
I'm willing to be equanimous, seriously. Sure, Howard could just nod and smile every time, I get that. The fact that he still HAS his sponsorship shows he almost always is. But the one I caught was #25 about how hard the laughter was. If you're able with good humor to be teased, kidded, or mocked consistently about one meal you missed the mark on three years ago in the same kitchen in front of everyone you work with without a few \"#### you's", along the way, I'll understand better.
Or he could ignore it. Or he could say, "Hey, stop bothering me." Any of these are reasonable responses.
Howard's doing the one thing that doesn't seem reasonable. He's declaring that he was right about Perez all along. He was right in 2007, when he made a spot-on prediction about Perez. But he's stroking this one feather in his cap while ignoring the many other things he said about Perez that proved spectacularly incorrect. Howard doesn't get mocked just for the Koufax comment but for the general pattern of Ollie man love. It took me about 10 seconds with the search function to find Howard saying that Perez's 2007 "might well be his floor," Howard comparing Perez favorably to Sabathia as a potential signing, Howard pimping Perez (in his "physical prime") as likely to surpass Derek Lowe in value (Perez threw another 46 innings)...
I'm sure it would wear thin, and I understand your annoyance with the same topic coming up all the time. But if I had served dogshit I wouldn't still be insisting, years later, that it was delicious.
"Boy, Ollie Perez is really terrible."
"I know, and so few innings."
DB
To start, thanks for responding. It's always cool to interact with the author, ya ken? Besides, I was probably the second most bullish Ollie Perez backer on Earth back in 07-08. Anywho --
Fair enough wrt durability. I just think it's a big enough difference to be dispositive, though that's mostly a point in favor of Uggla. WRT offensive value, I think that there's a significant enough difference in the way their value is derived that they still can't really be called comparable. I understand that holistic measures may view things differently, but for practical purposes, they really are very, very different players and will be deployed accordingly.
I might be nuts, but I think Duda's looked like not-a-total-piece-of-crap out there. My guess is that this point will be largely moot by the second half because I'd bet that either Duda or Murphy will be moved to LF to replace Bay. The Mets have to cut their losses on Bay at some point, and if he's on pace for another 250/15HR season in July, he might as well get released.
Oooh, I think you're nuts. He's a butcher. Not that I would do anything about it at this point. I like his bat, and he deserves a chance to improve.
I agree with this. Duda's sort of Canseco-esque out there.
Welp, I know when I've been outvoted. I still think he's progressed since last season, and maybe that's why I've got him as not-utter-crap.
I'm going to next Wednesday's game in Atlanta specifically to see Duda play the field. Hopefully the Braves will start Juan Francisco at 3B and we can have a contest to see who is the worst defender imaginable.
Fair enough wrt durability. I just think it's a big enough difference to be dispositive, though that's mostly a point in favor of Uggla. WRT offensive value, I think that there's a significant enough difference in the way their value is derived that they still can't really be called comparable. I understand that holistic measures may view things differently, but for practical purposes, they really are very, very different players and will be deployed accordingly.
FWIW, I don't disagree with you on any of this. I'm just not sure we have a handle on what Murphy's durability at 2B will be like if they just let him play the damn position without jerking him around. So naturally, Terry said today if Wright goes on the DL, he's moving Murphy to 3B.
On the other stuff- I've never hesitated to point out, myself, when I get things wrong. The Perez FA contract- definitely wrong. General optimism about Perez proved wrong- I sponsor him because I find it amusing.
Nor is it the only time I've gotten something wrong. Thought extending Jeter and, before that, giving Posada four years were both major mistakes. I write about baseball every day. I think I get most of it right, but I'll get some things wrong, and I'm happy to own up to them.
What I won't do is browbeat myself until you are satisfied when you tell me I've said something I haven't said. You want to call that unreasonable, fine.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main