BBTF's Newsblog Discussion :: FOX Sports: Rosenthal: Dodgers infield now loaded with Furcal

Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Wednesday, March 15, 2006

FOX Sports: Rosenthal: Dodgers infield now loaded with Furcal

The latest from Rosenthal…

With Opening Day less than three weeks away, scouts watching the Red Sox say the team should be concerned about third baseman Mike Lowell, 32, and first baseman J.T. Snow, 38.

Lowell, in the words of one scout, has “lost his body quickness.” Snow also lacks athleticism. Kevin Youkilis, 27, can’t play both first and third — and after hitting only one homer in 79 at-bats last season, he might lack sufficient power to be a corner infielder for a championship club.

The Red Sox have a starting pitcher to trade — left-hander David Wells, right-hander Matt Clement or right-hander Bronson Arroyo — and they’re also shopping second baseman Tony Graffanino. But it seems doubtful they would address first base or third before the start of the season.

Repoz Posted: March 15, 2006 at 05:16 AM | 55 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
Tags:

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. Guapo Posted: March 15, 2006 at 05:42 AM (#1899173)

Lowell, in the words of one scout, has “lost his body quickness.”

If only there were some kind of drug that, in combination with diligent training, would allow him to recapture it.

2. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: March 15, 2006 at 05:56 AM (#1899177)

Lol

Dude, put Loretta at 3B, Out Machine at SS, Graff at 2B, Youk at 1B. And screw Lowell.

3. Foster Posted: March 15, 2006 at 06:12 AM (#1899186)

They could cobble together a nice Lowell-Youks-Snow thing, where they each get 400ish plate appearances. I don't think it's as bad as Rosenbot describes.

4. PreservedFish Posted: March 15, 2006 at 06:37 AM (#1899189)

Wait, why is Snow their starter? Seems a weird choice. Youks + Snow is like a platoon of Frank Menechinos.

5. robneyer

Posted: March 15, 2006 at 07:02 AM (#1899209)

I'll bet a quarter that Youkilis plays more than both Lowell and Snow. And if the Red Sox need a third baseman, all the projections suggest that Pedroia's ready to play second base right now.

With all their options everywhere but the outfield, the Red Sox's problem isn't a lack of talent. It's sorting through all the players who might be good (but of course some of them won't).

6. Walt Davis Posted: March 15, 2006 at 07:05 AM (#1899210)

1B on a championship caliber club?

Konerko
Millar
D Lee
Spiezio
Grace (37)
Tino (the year of his 86 OPS+)
Tino
Tino
Conine

Generally speaking, that is not a lot to live up to.

7. The Anthony Kennedy of BBTF (Scott) Posted: March 15, 2006 at 07:17 AM (#1899215)

the 3b the year Millar won was Mueller, neither of whom were great. Konerko was Joe Crede, but Konerko is pretty decent. Spezio was Glaus, which is pretty good. D Lee had a younger Lowell, who was pretty good. Grace had an aged Matt Williams, which was pretty the suck. Tino had Brosius, who was great the first season, but horrible the last two. Bonilla teamed with Conine, not that great.

so really, of the bunch, only Konerko, Lowell, Tino and Glaus (and '98 Brosius) were anything good.

8. DCW3 Posted: March 15, 2006 at 08:21 AM (#1899223)

FOX Sports: Rosenthal: Dodgers infield now loaded with Furcal

Well, we all knew Furcal would be loaded, but I didn't realize the rest of the infield would be as well.

(Come on, nobody got there before I did? For shame.)

9. Dr. Vaux Posted: March 15, 2006 at 09:11 AM (#1899230)

Like Phillies, Mets think bullpen is more important than rotation; Braves chuckle to selves

10. Infinite Yost (Voxter)

Posted: March 15, 2006 at 09:24 AM (#1899234)

With Opening Day less than three weeks away, scouts watching the Red Sox say the team should be concerned about third baseman Mike Lowell, 32, and first baseman J.T. Snow, 38

If it's possible to know less about Lowell than me and still be a Sox fan, I'm not sure how that's accomplished. But JT Snow is, has been, and will be a chump. I don't think anyone in the Red Sox organization is surprised by that. The only reason he's around is that he doesn't cause immediate mind meld.

11. Infinite Yost (Voxter)

Posted: March 15, 2006 at 09:25 AM (#1899235)

Also:

David Wells for Furcal! Gold Glove! Perpetual dynasty!

12. Infinite Yost (Voxter)

Posted: March 15, 2006 at 09:30 AM (#1899236)

In the real world, I think that the Dogers made a good move by signing Furcal short-term and all, but the Garciaparra signing was overboard given what was in the fold at SS & 2B, and the odds that they're going to get much for Izturis at the trade deadline are not good. Good-glove, ass-end-bat second basemen are fairly common, even if they can play a strong short. See: Cora, Alex. They're likely to get dimes on the dollar.

13. Phil Coorey. Posted: March 15, 2006 at 10:02 AM (#1899251)

It didn't take a Rubik's Cube to work out that Snow would suck.

14. Infinite Yost (Voxter)

Posted: March 15, 2006 at 10:09 AM (#1899254)

It didn't take a Rubik's Cube to work out that Snow would suck.

No, but if you believe certain factions, by this point, the Sox have devoted serious nanotechnology to the subject. Making them "nerds" and Moneyball "one long math equasion".

15. CONservative governMENt Posted: March 15, 2006 at 10:24 AM (#1899262)

It didn't take a Rubik's Cube to work out that Snow would suck.

I thought there were Sox fans here who went into great detail about how Snow is an intriguing asset against RHPs.

16. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: March 15, 2006 at 10:28 AM (#1899264)

Dont' look at me, I was the one saying that he was a declining geriatric that might be useful as defensive caddy

17. Infinite Yost (Voxter)

Posted: March 15, 2006 at 10:31 AM (#1899266)

I thought there were Sox fans here who went into great detail about how Snow is an intriguing asset against RHPs.

As a Sox fan, I can say with confidence that such people are not only grasping at straws, they are grasping as seaweed. Snow is no longer an asset on defense, and he batted almost exclusively against RHPs last year but only managed to slug .376 against them. Any suggestion that he's worthwhile is based on out-dated ideas of what his D around the slugbag and slugging abilities might be.

18. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: March 15, 2006 at 11:55 AM (#1899270)

The questions about Snow and Lowell were always observational rather than statistical. Both project to be useful major leaguers. The question was whether there was some real loss of skill in 2005 - perfectly reasonable given their age - that invalidates the simple math of the projections.

I've thought JT Snow looked all right in the games I've seen. Nothing special, but he seemed athletic enough to play 1B part time. I haven't seen enough of Lowell to speak to his problems either way.

19. J.C. Bradbury Posted: March 15, 2006 at 01:03 PM (#1899283)

PrOPs says Lowell and Snow both sucked last year.

Lowell: .261/.320/.383/.703
Snow: .263/.331/.370/.700

It doesn't mean they won't bounce back, but they didn't just suffer from bad luck. It's going to be fun to watch how Marte plays this year. He may break hearts is Boston and Atlanta.

20. Russ Posted: March 15, 2006 at 01:04 PM (#1899284)

The Red Sox might consider flipping one of those starters to the Pirates for Craig Wilson...

21. Aevan Posted: March 15, 2006 at 01:34 PM (#1899299)

What Rosenthal said about Colorado makes no sense to me. I'm I the only one not impressed with Garret Atkins? Last year he hit .287 .347 .426 while playing unspectacular defense at 3rd. Ian Stewart is the future at 3rd, but I don't think Atkins is much of an asset anywhere. He wasn't even particularly young last year, at 25, so he might have a .300 .350 .450 year, but I just don't see this greatness that guys like Rosenthal and SI see.

22. John DiFool2 Posted: March 15, 2006 at 01:53 PM (#1899312)

Snow has a consistent history of being inconsistent, tho at his age I doubt he has one more "up" season in him. Give Youks 500 AB and I'll be quite happy.

23. Rally Posted: March 15, 2006 at 02:03 PM (#1899320)

Dude, put Loretta at 3B, Out Machine at SS, Graff at 2B, Youk at 1B. And screw Lowell.

That would be cool. It might rival Figgins-Eckstein/Cabrera-Kennedy-Erstad for the least powerful IF since the deadball era.

Snow is just there for the same reason Minky and Olderdude were. They are determined not to lose any important games because of poor late inning defense at 1B.

They worry so much about this, something very traumatic must have happened to 1B years ago.

24. Hubie Brooks (Not Really) Posted: March 15, 2006 at 02:03 PM (#1899321)

Does a team with Manny and Papi really need power from the corner infield spots?

25. veer bender Posted: March 15, 2006 at 02:25 PM (#1899330)

They worry so much about this, something very traumatic must have happened to 1B years ago.

26. ellsbury my heart at wounded knee Posted: March 15, 2006 at 03:02 PM (#1899374)

I can only assume Petagine was let go because of his horrible defense, and would have just been a liability anyway, right? RIGHT??? Because it would be nice if the Red Sox had someone like that as a plan B right now.

27. veer bender Posted: March 15, 2006 at 03:12 PM (#1899392)

Oh, no, we had to drop Petagine to keep Flaherty on the roster.

28. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: March 15, 2006 at 03:13 PM (#1899394)

Dude, put Loretta at 3B, Out Machine at SS, Graff at 2B, Youk at 1B. And screw Lowell.

That would be cool. It might rival Figgins-Eckstein/Cabrera-Kennedy-Erstad for the least powerful IF since the deadball era.

Other than outmachine at SS, they can all get on base. And they are all relatively good at defense.

It's not like Mike Lowell and JT Snow are going to be better options for power. Right now the Red Sox have 3 sources of power: Greatest American Hero, Manny, and Tek. Everybody else's job is to not make outs so we can have Ortiz come up more times and to make sure when Ortiz comes up he has runners on.

29. PJ Martinez Posted: March 15, 2006 at 03:25 PM (#1899406)

Speaking of both the Dodgers and the Sox infields (and the kick-*** Korea team), what would it take to get Hee-Seop Choi at this point? How much longer do the Dodgers control him? Through 2008? Or just 2007?

I know he's been disappointing, but .336/.453 in LA at age 26 is not horrendous, especially given the very good numbers he was putting up in Florida before the trade and the decent half-season he had in Chicago at age 24. I think he still has upside.

How set is Colletti on holding onto this guy? Signing Nomar didn't suggest a ton of confidence in him.

30. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: March 15, 2006 at 03:30 PM (#1899413)

Choi/Youkilis 1B Platoon: Wet Spreadsheets

31. Barry`s_Lazy_Boy Posted: March 15, 2006 at 03:45 PM (#1899428)

Does a team with Manny and Papi really need power from the corner infield spots?

Doesn't mean they can run a bag of #### out to each position, either.

32. covelli chris p Posted: March 15, 2006 at 03:48 PM (#1899430)

(and the kick-*** Korea team)

choi doesn't play 1b for korea. he's part of a dh platoon.

Choi/Youkilis 1B Platoon: Wet Spreadsheets

tmi, wok.

33. covelli chris p Posted: March 15, 2006 at 03:51 PM (#1899437)

I know that might just be a joke, but it's pretty clear that 1986 isn't the cause of the current 1B defensive replacement obsession. Who running the team now would be traumatized by that? The first manager under this ownership and GM didn't pull his 1B for defense. This is a peculiar quirk of the current field manager that really got cemented by the Mientkiewicz (sp?) trade and subsequent world series. Ever since he has really liked having a veteran name player with an outdated rep for excellent, not good, defense.

or it may be the result of research into the importance of 1b defense, specifically in fenway park. i've mentioned this before, but according to tom tippet, 1b defense is more important in fenway and 3b defense is less important due to the shape of the fences down the foul lines.

34. Rally Posted: March 15, 2006 at 03:56 PM (#1899444)

I know that might just be a joke, but it's pretty clear that 1986 isn't the cause of the current 1B defensive replacement obsession. Who running the team now would be traumatized by that?

Ok, it was mostly a joke, but Theo was a fan before a GM. Who's to say that a 13? year old Theo didn't vow "If I ever run the team, we won't have any stiffs playing 1B in the late innings"

I know if I ever get Bill Stoneman's job, I'll have a psychologist screening potential closers for suicidal personality traits.

35. RP Posted: March 15, 2006 at 04:11 PM (#1899464)

Choi/Youkilis 1B Platoon: Wet Spreadsheets

good one

36. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: March 15, 2006 at 04:19 PM (#1899474)

Snow is just there for the same reason Minky and Olderdude were. They are determined not to lose any important games because of poor late inning defense at 1B.

They worry so much about this, something very traumatic must have happened to 1B years ago.

I thought that was brilliant. Well played.

37. PJ Martinez Posted: March 15, 2006 at 05:17 PM (#1899565)

Looking over the Dodgers roster, it's not clear they match up well at all. They seem relatively set with pitching, and obviously don't need another infielder like Graffanino. That's too bad.

38. Klutts Posted: March 15, 2006 at 05:49 PM (#1899591)

39. ellsbury my heart at wounded knee Posted: March 15, 2006 at 06:11 PM (#1899643)

What about Nady? I could be convinced that he has a good defensive rep. Couldn't the Mets use Graff or something? The Sox don't really have many Latin players to offer, but if you take the Graff out of Graffanino's name, Tony Anino could be from Argentina or something.

40. veer bender Posted: March 15, 2006 at 06:32 PM (#1899683)

I think the proper Spanish translation of "Graffanino" is "Cora"

41. ghostrunner Posted: March 15, 2006 at 07:22 PM (#1899764)

What the hell is "body quickness?" and how does it differ from the more general kind?

42. PJ Martinez Posted: March 15, 2006 at 07:36 PM (#1899779)

Todd Helton has had a great career, albeit in Colorado. He's also owed a billion dollars. I don't see any way the Sox trade for him, particularly if it means giving up significant talent and/or paying all of his remaining salary.

I do think the Sox have a shot at Nady: the Mets could use a 2B and starting pitching. If the Sox really want Nady I think they have what it takes to get him. But it's possible the Mets value Nady more than the Sox do. I'm sure the Sox would send Graffanino along, but would they send Wells? Would the Mets be too troubled by Wells's health to make that deal? Nady will be in his age 27 season, but his ML #s are pretty unremarkable. Maybe Fenway will help, but probably not enough to make him a significant asset at 1B, unless he breaks out in a pretty big way.

43. Sam M. Posted: March 15, 2006 at 08:02 PM (#1899812)

What about Nady?

No way the Mets are trading away corner outfielders right now, not with the uncertainty surrounding Cliff Floyd's kidneys.

Nice riff on the whole Hispanic thing, though.

44. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: March 15, 2006 at 08:33 PM (#1899850)

Too bad the Royals couldn't move Sweeney before his annual injury.

45. Randomly Fluctuating Defensive Metric Posted: March 15, 2006 at 08:35 PM (#1899853)

What the hell is "body quickness?" and how does it differ from the more general kind?

I think in scout talk it's overall body speed on quick movements. Quick pivots after back hand scoops, the stride in swings, hand speed, basic reactions.

46. Dr Love Posted: March 15, 2006 at 08:36 PM (#1899855)

Too bad the Royals couldn't move Sweeney before his annual injury.

You gotta look at it from the other angle. Now a team that's looking to aquire him knows that his annual injury is behind him and he should be good to go for the rest of the season.

47. Tonight's special is maggot-infested carcass Posted: March 15, 2006 at 08:46 PM (#1899865)

What the hell is "body quickness?" and how does it differ from the more general kind?

You'll find it often goes hand in hand with the good face.

48. MM1f Posted: March 15, 2006 at 08:54 PM (#1899873)

"Stewart could then move to 1B, Atkins staying at 3B with Tulowitzki the SS next year. "

Atkins is the Clint Barmes of 3b. Decent, cheap, youngish stopgap who'll put up solid numbers (plus Coors inflation) and be moved for something decent when Stewart is ready to take over.

There were some worries about Stewarts glove but reports have improved and it seems that the rockies REALLY want him to be their Chipper Jones.

Plus if they do move Stewart to first theres always one of Nelson or Tulo that could go to third

49. DCA Posted: March 15, 2006 at 09:24 PM (#1899920)

I think the proper Spanish translation of "Graffanino" is "Cora"

Graffanino has had a 100 OPS+ or better in >100 PA five times. Alex and Joey, once each in their careers.

50. DCA Posted: March 15, 2006 at 09:30 PM (#1899940)

Interesting article on several fronts. Looking at the Rox and Redsox, wouldn't Helton for Lester and Ellsbury and maybe a third prospect make all sorts of sense. Stewart could then move to 1B, Atkins staying at 3B with Tulowitzki the SS next year. Francis and Lester at the top of the rotation looks sweet too.

This actually makes a bit of sense. The Rockies have to be looking to unload Helton, and the Red Sox can afford to overpay. I've heard bad things about Atkins' glove, so actually a Lester + Ellsbury + Lowell deal would make even more sense. Atkins can get into the RF/DH mix with Hawpe and Shealy. Lowell is a "name" to excuse dealing the franchise player (a la Soriano / A-Rod), and he should put up Castilla-type numbers and either keep 3B warm for 2 years until Stewart is ready in 2008 or mid-2007, or get passed on for more youngsters in a year if Coors is kind to him.

51. Honkie Kong Posted: March 15, 2006 at 10:38 PM (#1900083)

Plus if they do move Stewart to first theres always one of Nelson or Tulo that could go to third

Nelson's stock has dropped big time. I think he will need a big year to offset the free fall. Someone in the other thread mentioned Atkins was a butcher at third. Any chance of moving him to the OF?

52. PJ Martinez Posted: March 15, 2006 at 10:53 PM (#1900107)

Courtesy of an old ESPN article:

"Under terms of the extension, Helton will receive $10.6 million in 2003, $11.6 million in '04, $12.6 million in '05, $16.6 million from '06-'10 and $19.1 in '11. The Rockies have an option pay Helton $23 million in 2012 or execute a $4.6 million buyout."

I repeat: highly unlikely the Sox take that on. Trading Lowell puts a small dent in the numbers, but not enough. Why trade Lester + Ellsbury now when the same package, or something like it, probably could have landed Delgado a couple of months ago?

The combination of leaving Coors and getting older present serious risks, and owing anyone that much money for that long is scary. Manny's contract, by contrast, appears guaranteed only through 2008, so far as I can tell, with team options thereafter.

53. bardos Posted: March 16, 2006 at 06:37 AM (#1901276)

Is "loss of body quickness" a new euphemism for "forced by testing to give up steroids"?

54. Infinite Yost (Voxter)

Posted: March 16, 2006 at 10:16 AM (#1901442)

Looking at the Rox and Redsox, wouldn't Helton for Lester and Ellsbury and maybe a third prospect make all sorts of sense

Yeah, maybe, if Helton wasn't signed until 2011. (!)

The questions about Snow and Lowell were always observational rather than statistical. Both project to be useful major leaguers.

You're kidding, right?

JT Snow:
PECOTA: .270 / .336 / .413
ZiPs: .267 / .346 / .378
Bill James: .270 / .364 / .389

The most sanguine of those projections is probably James', which is still profoundly bad for a first baseman, backup or otherwise. Lowell is probably a different case, but J.T. Snow will be 38 this year, he's been displaying old-player skills since he was 10 years old, and 2004 is the only year in this century in which he's been anything more than "kinda maybe useful if he's got a good glove" (which he doesn't anymore).

55. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: March 16, 2006 at 11:52 AM (#1901447)

Bill James: .270 / .364 / .389

That's Kevin Millar bad.

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

<< Back to main

Wednesday, March 15, 2006

FOX Sports: Rosenthal: Dodgers infield now loaded with Furcal

Reader Comments and Retorts

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

Hot Topics